IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v50y2015icp172-179.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Production efficiency of community forest management in Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Chand, Narendra
  • Kerr, Geoffrey N.
  • Bigsby, Hugh

Abstract

Nepal's forests have been transferred to community management with the twin objectives of supplying forest products and addressing local environmental problems. Community forests provide a range of benefits, from direct forest products such as timber and non-provisioning ecosystem services such as soil protection. There is a need to understand the extent to which environmental and community benefits are joint products or substitutes. Stochastic frontier production analysis (SFPA) was used to study the production relationship between environmental and community benefits and production efficiency analysis to study the extent to which communities were able to achieve maximum benefits. SFPA indicated that the magnitude of direct forest product benefits was influenced by various socioeconomic and forest related factors such as distance to the government office, community forest size, and group heterogeneity negatively affect community forest products benefits. On the other hand, links to the market, forest products dependency, and the number of households in the community augment benefits from community forests. In addition, forest product benefits and environmental benefits were complementary to each other. Production efficiency analysis showed that communities were not producing forest products efficiently. Factors such as social capital contributed positively to production efficiency, whereas caste heterogeneity in the executive committees of community forest user groups was negatively associated with efficiency. These findings can contribute to better implementation of community forestry programmes in Nepal, improving the welfare of communities by increasing direct forest product benefits without environmental harm.

Suggested Citation

  • Chand, Narendra & Kerr, Geoffrey N. & Bigsby, Hugh, 2015. "Production efficiency of community forest management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 172-179.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:50:y:2015:i:c:p:172-179
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2014.09.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934114001488
    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. Anil Bera & Subhash Sharma, 1999. "Estimating Production Uncertainty in Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 187-210, November.
    2. Agrawal, Arun & Gupta, Krishna, 2005. "Decentralization and Participation: The Governance of Common Pool Resources in Nepal's Terai," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 1101-1114, July.
    3. Agrawal, Arun, 2001. "Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1649-1672, October.
    4. Mani Nepal & Alok K. Bohara & Robert P. Berrens, 2007. "The Impacts of Social Networks and Household Forest Conservation Efforts in Rural Nepal," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(2), pages 174-191.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Duke, Joshua M. & Aull-Hyde, Rhonda, 2002. "Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 131-145, August.
    8. Grootaert, Christiaan & Narayan, Deepa, 2004. "Local Institutions, Poverty and Household Welfare in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1179-1198, July.
    9. Bhim Adhikari & Jon Lovett, 2006. "Institutions and collective action: Does heterogeneity matter in community-based resource management?," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 426-445.
    10. Misra, Dinesh & Kant, Shashi, 2005. "Economic efficiency and shadow prices of social and biological outputs of village-level organizations of joint forest management in Gujarat, India," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 141-160, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Nalle, Darek J. & Montgomery, Claire A. & Arthur, Jeffrey L. & Polasky, Stephen & Schumaker, Nathan H., 2004. "Modeling joint production of wildlife and timber," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 997-1017, November.
    13. Coelli, Tim J., 1995. "Recent Developments In Frontier Modelling And Efficiency Measurement," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 39(03), December.
    14. Kant, Shashi, 2000. "A dynamic approach to forest regimes in developing economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 287-300, February.
    15. Ashok Parikh & Farman Ali & Mir Kalan Shah, 1995. "Measurement of Economic Efficiency in Pakistani Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(3), pages 675-685.
    16. 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.
    17. Wade, Robert, 1987. "The Management of Common Property Resources: Collective Action as an Alternative to Privatisation or State Regulation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 95-106, June.
    18. Agrawal, Arun & Chhatre, Ashwini, 2006. "Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 149-166, January.
    19. Pretty, Jules & Ward, Hugh, 2001. "Social Capital and the Environment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-227, February.
    20. Van Ha, Nguyen & Kant, Shashi & Maclaren, Virginia, 2006. "Relative shadow prices of social capital for household-level paper recycling units in Vietnam," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 520-533, May.
    21. Léopold Simar, 2007. "How to improve the performances of DEA/FDH estimators in the presence of noise?," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 183-201, December.
    22. Yangseon Kim & Peter Schmidt, 2000. "A Review and Empirical Comparison of Bayesian and Classical Approaches to Inference on Efficiency Levels in Stochastic Frontier Models with Panel Data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 91-118, September.
    23. Misra, Dinesh & Kant, Shashi, 2004. "Production analysis of collaborative forest management using an example of joint forest management from Gujarat, India," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 301-320, June.
    24. Edmonds, Eric V., 2002. "Government-initiated community resource management and local resource extraction from Nepal's forests," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 89-115, June.
    25. Jeff Dayton-Johnson & Pranab Bardhan, 2002. "Inequality And Conservation On The Local Commons: A Theoretical Exercise," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(481), pages 577-602, July.
    26. Jondrow, James & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Materov, Ivan S. & Schmidt, Peter, 1982. "On the estimation of technical inefficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 233-238, August.
    27. Bigsby, Hugh R., 1994. "Production Structure And The Australian Sawmilling Industry," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 38(03), December.
    28. Bardhan, Pranab, 1993. "Analytics of the institutions of informal cooperation in rural development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 633-639, April.
    29. 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(01), pages 7-31, February.
    30. Heltberg, Rasmus, 2001. "Determinants and impact of local institutions for common resource management," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(02), pages 183-208, May.
    31. 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.
    32. Gebremedhin, Berhanu & Pender, John & Tesfay, Girmay, 2003. "Community natural resource management: the case of woodlots in Northern Ethiopia," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(01), pages 129-148, February.
    33. White, T Anderson & Runge, C Ford, 1994. "Common Property and Collective Action: Lessons from Cooperative Watershed Management in Haiti," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 1-41, October.
    34. Fisher, Monica, 2004. "Household welfare and forest dependence in Southern Malawi," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(02), pages 135-154, May.
    35. Christiaan Grootaert & Gi-Taik Oh & Anand Swamy, 2002. "Social Capital, Household Welfare and Poverty in Burkina Faso," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE), vol. 11(1), pages 4-38, March.
    36. Chakraborty, Rabindra Nath, 2001. "Stability and outcomes of common property institutions in forestry: evidence from the Terai region of Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 341-353, February.
    37. Cernea, M.M., 1989. "User Groups As Producers In Participatory Afforestation Strategies," World Bank - Discussion Papers 70, World Bank.
    38. Cooper, Samuel T. & Cohn, Elchanan, 1997. "Estimation of a frontier production function for the South Carolina educational process," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 313-327, June.
    39. Mark E. Lichtenstein & Claire A. Montgomery, 2003. "Biodiversity and Timber in the Coast Range of Oregon: Inside the Production Possibility Frontier," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 56-73.
    40. Pender, John L. & Scherr, Sara J., 1999. "Organizational development and natural resource management: evidence from central Honduras," EPTD discussion papers 49, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    41. Alphonce, Christian B., 1997. "Application of the analytic hierarchy process in agriculture in developing countries," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 97-112, January.
    42. Cornia, Giovanni Andrea, 1985. "Farm size, land yields and the agricultural production function: An analysis for fifteen developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 513-534, April.
    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. 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.
    2. repec:eee:ecoser:v:26:y:2017:i:pb:p:316-328 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:eee:foreco:v:28:y:2017:i:c:p:87-95 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Manzoor, Talha & Rovenskaya, Elena & Muhammad, Abubakr, 2016. "Game-theoretic insights into the role of environmentalism and social-ecological relevance: A cognitive model of resource consumption," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 340(C), pages 74-85.
    5. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena, 2016. "Exploring the interlinkages between governance and social capital: A dynamic model for forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 25-36.
    6. repec:eee:enepol:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:394-403 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:50:y:2015:i:c:p:172-179. 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.