IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v23y2021i10d10.1007_s10668-021-01301-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The potential perils of Sal forests land grabbing in Bangladesh: an analysis of economic, social and ecological perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Kazi Kamrul Islam

    (Bangladesh Agricultural University)

  • Kimihiko Hyakumura

    (Kyushu University)

Abstract

The increased demand for foods and commercialization of the commodity markets has resulted in enormous interest in arable land resources, leading to a rapid expansion of forest land into arable land. The Sal forests of Bangladesh have been rapidly grabbed into commercial purposes, which made the forests a threatened ecosystem. Therefore, the objective of the study was to identify the economic, social and ecological impacts of land grabbing on the sustainable development of Sal forests in Bangladesh. Using different qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques from the Madhupur and Bhawal Sal forests of Bangladesh, the study clearly identified that the forestland grabbing has taken place with the assistance of state institutions. The economic outcomes of forestland grabbing were mainly seized by the state institutions and local elites, and a number of industries have been set up in and around the Sal forest areas which created huge pressure on forest biodiversity. Consequently, the ecological analysis showed that a significant number of plant species had lost and the remaining species were facing a critical situation. The study also found a violation of human rights and displacement of almost all ethnic respondents from their ancestral forestland. Therefore, the negligible economic gain of Sal forest land grabbing has not taken precedence over social and ecological consideration; a coordinated approach leading by the government level could stop land grabbing and ensure the sustainable development of Sal forests in Bangladesh.

Suggested Citation

  • Kazi Kamrul Islam & Kimihiko Hyakumura, 2021. "The potential perils of Sal forests land grabbing in Bangladesh: an analysis of economic, social and ecological perspectives," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 15368-15390, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:23:y:2021:i:10:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01301-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-021-01301-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-021-01301-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-021-01301-7?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. MD. Salam & Toshikuni Noguchi, 2005. "On Sustainable Development of Social Forestry in Bangladesh: Experiences from Sal (Shorea Robusta) Forests," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 209-227, June.
    2. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    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. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Wang, Han & Tian, Fuan & Wu, Jianxian & Nie, Xin, 2023. "Is China forest landscape restoration (FLR) worth it? A cost-benefit analysis and non-equilibrium ecological view," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    3. Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago & Conceição, Pedro & Belbute, José, 2005. "Constraints on dematerialisation and allocation of natural capital along a sustainable growth path," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 382-396, September.
    4. Yajing Shao & Xuefeng Yuan & Chaoqun Ma & Ruifang Ma & Zhaoxia Ren, 2020. "Quantifying the Spatial Association between Land Use Change and Ecosystem Services Value: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    6. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    7. repec:dgr:rugcds:200218 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Toman, Michael & Pezzey, John C., 2002. "The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal Articles," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-03, Resources for the Future.
    9. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    10. Jiayu Xia & Duyuzheng Ren & Xuhui Wang & Bo Xu & Xingyao Zhong & Yajiang Fan, 2023. "Ecosystem Quality Assessment and Ecological Restoration in Fragile Zone of Loess Plateau: A Case Study of Suide County, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-32, May.
    11. Holmes, Thomas P. & Bergstrom, John C. & Huszar, Eric & Kask, Susan B. & Orr, Fritz, III, 2002. "Estimating The Local Economic Benefits Of Riparian Ecosystem Restoration Using Iterated Contingent Valuation," Faculty Series 16696, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    12. Zhang, Honghui & Zeng, Yongnian & Jin, Xiaobin & Shu, Bangrong & Zhou, Yinkang & Yang, Xuhong, 2016. "Simulating multi-objective land use optimization allocation using Multi-agent system—A case study in Changsha, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 334-347.
    13. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    14. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.
    15. Danny Casprini & Alessandra Oppio & Francesca Torrieri, 2023. "Usi Civici : Open Evaluation Issues in the Italian Legal Framework on Civic Use Properties," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Shane Orchard & Kenneth F. D. Hughey & Richard Measures & David R. Schiel, 2020. "Coastal tectonics and habitat squeeze: response of a tidal lagoon to co-seismic sea-level change," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(3), pages 3609-3631, September.
    17. Tiantian Ma & Qingbai Hu & Changle Wang & Jungang Lv & Changhong Mi & Rongguang Shi & Xiaoli Wang & Yanying Yang & Wenhao Wu, 2022. "Exploring the Relationship between Ecosystem Services under Different Socio-Economic Driving Degrees," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Mukherjee, Joyita & Scharler, Ursula M. & Fath, Brian D. & Ray, Santanu, 2015. "Measuring sensitivity of robustness and network indices for an estuarine food web model under perturbations," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 306(C), pages 160-173.
    19. Nelson, Anitra, 2001. "The poverty of money:: Marxian insights for ecological economists," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 499-511, March.
    20. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Oksana Logvinenko, 2020. "A New Look at the Natural Capital Concept: Approaches, Structure, and Evaluation Procedure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
    21. Nunes, Paulo A. L. D. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M., 2001. "Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 203-222, November.

    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:spr:endesu:v:23:y:2021:i:10:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01301-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.