IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v30y2013icp6-13.html

Community forestry in the hills of Nepal: Determinants of user participation in forest management

Author

Listed:
  • Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal
  • Johnsen, Fred Hakon
  • Konoshima, Masashi
  • Yoshimoto, Atsushi

Abstract

Community forestry in Nepal is one of the most cited examples of participatory management of natural resources. However, such programs have not yet been able to fully ensure equitable, gender-sensitive, and poverty-focused outcomes. This study examines factors influencing participation of households in forest protection, resource utilization, and collective resource management decision-making activities. The study was conducted among five selected forest user groups in the Kaski District. The analysis is based on a household survey that included a random sample of 176 respondents (69 males and 107 females). Three ordered logit regression models were developed to examine determinants of household participation in forest protection, resource utilization, and decision-making activities. Analysis showed that larger sized households belonging to forest user groups that owned less land were more likely to participate in forest protection activities. Women from larger households located closer to forests and markets were more likely to participate in forest resource utilization activities. Households with more livestock belonging to forest user groups that managed forests in good condition were also more inclined to participate in resource utilization activities. Women and individuals from lower castes demonstrated lower levels of participation in decision-making processes. Low participation was associated with education level and traditional customs, which may result in low representation of some social groups in forest user group committees.

Suggested Citation

  • Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Johnsen, Fred Hakon & Konoshima, Masashi & Yoshimoto, Atsushi, 2013. "Community forestry in the hills of Nepal: Determinants of user participation in forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 6-13.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:30:y:2013:i:c:p:6-13
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.01.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934113000324
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.01.010?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

    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. Goulet, Denis, 1989. "Participation in development: New avenues," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 165-178, February.
    3. Rasmus Heltberg & Thomas Channing Arndt & Nagothu Udaya Sekhar, 2000. "Fuelwood Consumption and Forest Degradation: A Household Model for Domestic Energy Substitution in Rural India," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 213-232.
    4. 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.
    5. Adhikari, Bhim, 2005. "Poverty, property rights and collective action: understanding the distributive aspects of common property resource management," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 7-31, February.
    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. 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.
    8. Arun Agrawal & Elinor Ostrom, 2001. "Collective Action, Property Rights, and Decentralization in Resource Use in India and Nepal," Politics & Society, , vol. 29(4), pages 485-514, December.
    9. Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Lund, Jens Friis & Nielsen, Øystein Juul, 2012. "The public finance potential of community forestry in Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 113-121.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2009. "Heterogeneity and Collective Management: Evidence from Common Forests in Himachal Pradesh, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 676-686, March.
    3. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2011. "Rural Livelihoods, Forest Access and Time Use: A Study of Forest Communities in Northwest India," MPRA Paper 31060, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Shrestha, Sujata & Shrestha, Uttam Babu, 2017. "Beyond money: Does REDD+ payment enhance household's participation in forest governance and management in Nepal's community forests?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 63-70.
    5. 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.
    6. Thapliyal, Sneha & Mukherji, Arnab & Malghan, Deepak, 2019. "Economic inequality and loss of commons: Evidence from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 693-712.
    7. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2011. "Gendered effects of work and participation in collective forest management," MPRA Paper 31091, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Behera, Bhagirath & Rahut, Dil Bahadur & Jeetendra, Aryal & Ali, Akhter, 2015. "Household collection and use of biomass energy sources in South Asia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 468-480.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Jane Kabubo‐Mariara, 2013. "Forest‐poverty nexus: Exploring the contribution of forests to rural livelihoods in Kenya," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 37(3), pages 177-188, August.
    12. Sapkota, Prativa & Keenan, Rodney J. & Ojha, Hemant R., 2018. "Community institutions, social marginalization and the adaptive capacity: A case study of a community forestry user group in the Nepal Himalayas," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 55-64.
    13. Frederike Klümper & Insa Theesfeld, 2017. "The Land–Water–Food Nexus: Expanding the Social–Ecological System Framework to Link Land and Water Governance," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16, July.
    14. Mazunda, John & Shively, Gerald, 2015. "Measuring the forest and income impacts of forest user group participation under Malawi's Forest Co-management Program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 262-273.
    15. Dambala Gelo & Steven F. Koch, 2011. "The Welfare Effect of Common Property Forestry Rights:Evidence from Ethiopian Villages," Working Papers 201123, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    16. Yadav, Bhagwan Dutta & Bigsby, Hugh & MacDonald, Ian, 2015. "How can poor and disadvantaged households get an opportunity to become a leader in community forestry in Nepal?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 27-38.
    17. 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.
    18. Tewathia, Nidhi, 2011. "Heterogeneity in Common Property Resource Management and its Implications," MPRA Paper 64010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Klümper, Frederike & Theesfeld, Insa, 2017. "The land-water-food nexus: expanding the social-ecological system framework to link land and water governance," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16.
    20. Satyal, Poshendra & Corbera, Esteve & Dawson, Neil & Dhungana, Hari & Maskey, Gyanu, 2020. "Justice-related impacts and social differentiation dynamics in Nepal's REDD+ projects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:forpol:v:30:y:2013:i:c:p:6-13. 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.