IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v13y2011i5p345-352.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest users and environmental impacts of community forestry in the hills of Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Pandit, Ram
  • Bevilacqua, Eddie

Abstract

Community forestry practice in Nepal emerged in late 1970s from the failure of centralized forest governance to implement participatory forest management that improves deteriorating environmental conditions and provides forest products to local populace in the hills. This research assessed the perceptions of socio-economically heterogeneous forest users from eight community forests of Dhading district on environmental impacts of community forestry practice using group interviews and case studies. Two environmental impact-related concepts: forest products supply and local environmental conditions were assessed using rating scale based perception-indicators among three social groups: elite, women, and disadvantaged. Irrespective of social grouping, statistical analysis of the summated rating scores suggests that users perceived increased forest products supply and improved environmental conditions at the local level. Comparison of perceived environmental impacts among eight community forests indicates some differences due to variation in forest attributes in these community forests. Findings from this study are in agreement with the published literature that the community forestry practice has brought a positive change in the local environmental conditions and forest products supply situations in the hills of Nepal.

Suggested Citation

  • Pandit, Ram & Bevilacqua, Eddie, 2011. "Forest users and environmental impacts of community forestry in the hills of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 345-352, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:5:p:345-352
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111000281
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. 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.
    2. Iversen, Vegard & Chhetry, Birka & Francis, Paul & Gurung, Madhu & Kafle, Ghanendra & Pain, Adam & Seeley, Janet, 2006. "High value forests, hidden economies and elite capture: Evidence from forest user groups in Nepal's Terai," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 93-107, June.
    3. Adhikari, Bhim & Williams, Frances & Lovett, Jon C., 2007. "Local benefits from community forests in the middle hills of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 464-478, January.
    4. Agarwal, Bina, 2009. "Gender and forest conservation: The impact of women's participation in community forest governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2785-2799, September.
    5. Agarwal, Bina, 2001. "Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1623-1648, October.
    6. 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.
    7. Ribot, Jesse C. & Agrawal, Arun & Larson, Anne M., 2006. "Recentralizing While Decentralizing: How National Governments Reappropriate Forest Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1864-1886, November.
    8. Towa Tachibana & Sunit Adhikari, 2009. "Does Community-Based Management Improve Natural Resource Condition? Evidence from the Forests in Nepal," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 107-131.
    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. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    2. St. Clair, Priscilla Cooke, 2016. "Community forest management, gender and fuelwood collection in rural Nepal," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 52-71.
    3. repec:eee:foreco:v:26:y:2017:i:c:p:9-29 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. 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.
    5. Schusser, Carsten & Krott, Max & Yufanyi Movuh, Mbolo C. & Logmani, Jacqueline & Devkota, Rosan R. & Maryudi, Ahamad & Salla, Manjola & Bach, Ngo Duy, 2015. "Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results of an international study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 92-101.
    6. Surender Kumar & Prerna Prabhakar, "undated". "Negative Carbon Leakage : evidence from South Asian Countries," Working papers 107, The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics.
    7. Schusser, Carsten & Krott, Max & Movuh, Mbolo C. Yufanyi & Logmani, Jacqueline & Devkota, Rosan R. & Maryudi, Ahmad & Salla, Manjola, 2016. "Comparing community forestry actors in Cameroon, Indonesia, Namibia, Nepal and Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 81-87.
    8. repec:kqi:journl:2017-2-3 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. 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.

    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:13:y:2011:i:5:p:345-352. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.