IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/feemnr/37669.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Institutions and Forest Management: A Case Study from Swat, Pakistan

Author

Listed:
  • Gideon, Kruseman
  • Lorenzo, Pellegrini

Abstract

Deforestation in the North western part of Pakistan is a long standing problem. The Forestry Department, as formal managers of the forest resources, has been undergoing a long reform process aimed at improving its performance. This reform process has not resulted in less deforestation. From the policy perspective this has been leading to stated intentions to further reform the Forestry Department, the question is whether organizational reform is the answer. We think there are more limiting bottlenecks to sustainable forest management in Pakistan. De facto property rights are not as simple as denoted by statutory law. In this article we explore the mechanisms behind the deforestation and try to uncover mechanisms to reverse the process. Although our conclusions are not very optimistic, we provide a framework for determining the bottlenecks in the management of common resources from the perspective of institutions. We show that in circumstances where institutional change is necessary we are faced with a trade-off between the transaction costs related to the enforcement of “improved” institutional arrangements and the transaction costs improving enforceable institutional arrangements. Incurring these transaction costs only makes sense if the benefits from improved institutional arrangements outweigh them and the transition costs. When we relate this dilemma to the management regime of the forest in North west Pakistan, we identify at the one end of the spectrum the ideal forest management system; at the other end we see the spontaneous evolution of self organization. The current situation is an intermediate form with an incoherent set of external interventions and strategic reactions by different agents in the local communities. The emergent system of management is the one producing the present dismal outcome.

Suggested Citation

  • Gideon, Kruseman & Lorenzo, Pellegrini, 2008. "Institutions and Forest Management: A Case Study from Swat, Pakistan," Natural Resources Management Working Papers 37669, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:feemnr:37669
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.37669
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/37669/files/42-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.37669?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    2. Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 1998. "Wealth Inequality and Efficiency in the Commons, Part II: The Regulated Case," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 1997. "Coordination problems in local-level resource management," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 197-210, June.
    4. Oliver E. Williamson, 2000. "The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 595-613, September.
    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. Lorenzo Pellegrini & Gideon Kruseman, 2008. "Institutions and Forest Management: A Case Study from Swat, Pakistan," Working Papers 2008.42, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    2. Bhagirath Behera & Pulak Mishra, 2018. "Democratic Local Institutions for Sustainable Management and Use of Minor Irrigation Systems: Experience of Pani Panchayats in Odisha, India," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(03), pages 1-27, July.
    3. Liu, Xiaoying & Sarr, Mare & Swanson, Timothy, 2014. "Resistance to the Regulation of Common Resources in Rural Tunisia," RFF Working Paper Series dp-14-17-efd, Resources for the Future.
    4. Behera, Bhagirath & Engel, Stefanie, 2006. "Institutional analysis of evolution of joint forest management in India: A new institutional economics approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 350-362, June.
    5. Gabriel Hoh Teck Ling & Pau Chung Leng & Chin Siong Ho, 2019. "Effects of Diverse Property Rights on Rural Neighbourhood Public Open Space (POS) Governance: Evidence from Sabah, Malaysia," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-33, June.
    6. Weinstein, Olivier, 2013. "Comment comprendre les « communs » : Elinor Ostrom, la propriété et la nouvelle économie institutionnelle," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 14.
    7. Cardenas, Juan-Camilo, 2003. "Real wealth and experimental cooperation: experiments in the field lab," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 263-289, April.
    8. Fekadu Beyene, 2009. "Collective action in water‐point management: The case of pastoral and agropastoral communities in eastern Ethiopia," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 33(3), pages 175-188, August.
    9. Krul, Kees & Ho, Peter & Yang, Xiuyun, 2020. "Incentivizing household forest management in China's forest reform: Limitations to rights-based approaches in Southwest China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    10. Prévost, Benoît & Rivaud, Audrey, 2018. "The World Bank’s environmental strategies: Assessing the influence of a biased use of New Institutional Economics on legal issues," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 370-380.
    11. Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 2001. "Land institutions and land markets," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 288-331, Elsevier.
    12. Qiuqiong Huang & Jinxia Wang & Scott Rozelle & Stephen Polasky & Yang Liu, 2013. "The Effects of Well Management and the Nature of the Aquifer on Groundwater Resources," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(1), pages 94-116.
    13. Ahmed, Irina & Deaton, B. James & Sarker, Rakhal & Virani, Tasneem, 2008. "Wetland ownership and management in a common property resource setting: A case study of Hakaluki Haor in Bangladesh," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 429-436, December.
    14. Alexandros Maziotis & Elisa Calliari & Jaroslav Mysiak, 2013. "Robust Institutions for Sustainable Water Markets: A Survey of the Literature and the Way Forward," Working Papers 2013.58, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Thiel, Andreas & Schleyer, Christian & Plieninger, Tobias, 2011. "Characteristics of resources and the provision of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Germany: the cases of fruit tree meadows and wolf protection," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 116082, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Chidakel, Alexander & Child, Brian, 2022. "Convergence and divergence in the economic performance of wildlife tourism within multi-reserve landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    17. Fisher, Janet A. & Patenaude, Genevieve & Giri, Kalpana & Lewis, Kristina & Meir, Patrick & Pinho, Patricia & Rounsevell, Mark D.A. & Williams, Mathew, 2014. "Understanding the relationships between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: A conceptual framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 34-45.
    18. Prasenjit Sarkhel, "undated". "Examining Private Participation in Embankment Maintenance in the Indian Sundarbans," Working papers 75, The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics.
    19. Caballero-Miguez, Gonzalo & Varela-Lafuente, Manuel M. & Dolores Garza-Gil, María, 2014. "Institutional change, fishing rights and governance mechanisms: The dynamics of the Spanish 300 fleet on the Grand Sole fishing grounds," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 465-472.
    20. Aggarwal, Rimjhim M., 2000. "Possibilities and Limitations to Cooperation in Small Groups: The Case of Group-Owned Wells in Southern India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 1481-1497, August.

    More about this item

    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:ags:feemnr:37669. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    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.