IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v82y2006i4p562-581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do the Poor Benefit from Devolution Policies? Evidence from Malawi’s Forest Co-Management Program

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Blessings Laurence Jumbe
  • Arild Angelsen

Abstract

Do local people, especially vulnerable households, benefit from devolution of forest management? We apply the propensity-score matching and decomposition techniques on household data from Chimaliro and Liwonde forest reserves under the pilot forest co-management program in Malawi. After controlling for selection bias, we find that while the program raises forest income for participants in Chimaliro, it reduces revenue for participants in Liwonde. Interestingly, results indicate that the program raises forest income for female and low-income participants, although male and richer participants capture more benefits due to discrimination and endowment differences accounting for 100% and 60% of the inter-group income disparity, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Blessings Laurence Jumbe & Arild Angelsen, 2006. "Do the Poor Benefit from Devolution Policies? Evidence from Malawi’s Forest Co-Management Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(4), pages 562-581.
  • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:82:y:2006:i:4:p:562-581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://le.uwpress.org/cgi/reprint/82/4/562
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.

    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. Andrews, Martyn J. & Stewart, Mark B. & Swaffield, Joanna K. & Upward, Richard, 1998. "The estimation of union wage differentials and the impact of methodological choices," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 449-474, December.
    2. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    3. Jolliffe, Dean & Campos, Nauro F., 2005. "Does market liberalisation reduce gender discrimination? Econometric evidence from Hungary, 1986-1998," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, February.
    4. F. L. Jones & Jonathan Kelley, 1984. "Decomposing Differences between Groups," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 12(3), pages 323-343, February.
    5. James Heckman & Salvador Navarro-Lozano, 2004. "Using Matching, Instrumental Variables, and Control Functions to Estimate Economic Choice Models," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 30-57, February.
    6. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1999. "The Pre-Program Earnings Dip and the Determinants of Participation in a Social Program: Implications for Simple Program Evaluation Strategies," NBER Working Papers 6983, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. 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.
    8. Heckman, James J & Smith, Jeffrey A, 1999. "The Pre-programme Earnings Dip and the Determinants of Participation in a Social Programme. Implications for Simple Programme Evaluation Strategies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(457), pages 313-348, July.
    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. Jumbe, Charles B.L. & Angelsen, Arild, 2006. "Household's Choice of Fuelwood Source in Malawi: A Multinomial Probit Analysis," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25450, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Craig Leisher & Leah H. Samberg & Pieter Van Buekering & M. Sanjayan, 2013. "Focal Areas for Measuring the Human Well-Being Impacts of a Conservation Initiative," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 5(3), pages 1-14, March.
    3. Arhin, Albert Abraham, 2014. "Safeguards and Dangerguards: A Framework for Unpacking the Black Box of Safeguards for REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 24-31.
    4. Dambala Gelo, Steven F. Koch and Edwin Muchapondwa, 2013. "Do the Poor Benefit from Devolution Policies? Evidences from Quantile Treatment Effect Evaluation of Joint Forest Management," Working Papers 400, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    5. Leo Zulu, 2013. "Bringing People Back into Protected Forests in Developing Countries: Insights from Co-Management in Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 5(5), pages 1-27, May.
    6. repec:bla:devpol:v:35:y:2017:i:6:p:723-744 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ameha, Aklilu & Nielsen, Oystein Juul & Larsen, Helle Overgard, 2014. "Impacts of access and benefit sharing on livelihoods and forest: Case of participatory forest management in Ethiopia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 162-171.
    8. Sánchez-Braza, Antonio & Pablo-Romero, María del P., 2014. "Evaluation of property tax bonus to promote solar thermal systems in Andalusia (Spain)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 832-843.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Keijiro Otsuka & Ridish Pokharel, 2014. "In search of appropriate institutions for forest management," GRIPS Discussion Papers 13-25, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    12. Gelo, Dambala & Muchapondwa, Edwin & Koch, Steven F., 2016. "Decentralization, market integration and efficiency-equity trade-offs: Evidence from Joint Forest Management in Ethiopian villages," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 1-23.
    13. Hegde, Ravi & Bull, Gary Q., 2011. "Performance of an agro-forestry based Payments-for-Environmental-Services project in Mozambique: A household level analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 122-130.
    14. 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.
    15. Keijiro Otsuka & Frank Place, 2013. "Evolutionary Changes in Land Tenure and Agricultural Intensification in Sub-Saharan Africa," GRIPS Discussion Papers 13-22, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    16. Bandyopadhyay, Sushenjit & Shyamsundar, Priya & Baccini, Alessandro, 2011. "Forests, biomass use and poverty in Malawi," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2461-2471.
    17. repec:eee:ecolec:v:143:y:2018:i:c:p:199-209 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Rodrigo A. Arriagada, & Paul J. Ferraro & Erin O. Sills & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Silvia Cordero-Sancho, 2012. "Do Payments for Environmental Services Affect Forest Cover? A Farm-Level Evaluation from Costa Rica," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 382-399.
    19. Jagger, Pamela & Jumbe, Charles, 2016. "Stoves or sugar? Willingness to adopt improved cookstoves in Malawi," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 409-419.
    20. Gelo, Dambala & Koch, Steven F., 2014. "The Impact of Common Property Right Forestry: Evidence from Ethiopian Villages," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 395-406.
    21. Mutune, Jane Mutheu & Lund, Jens Friis, 2016. "Unpacking the impacts of ‘participatory’ forestry policies: Evidence from Kenya," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 45-52.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    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:uwp:landec:v:82:y:2006:i:4:p:562-581. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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.