IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nzar10/96827.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why some community forests are performing better than others: a case of forest user groups in Nepal

Author

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

Abstract

Management of many Nepalese forests has been devolved to local communities. Forest products, which are used by the community and which may also be traded, are essential contributors to community well-being. Forests are also important contributors of ecosystem services, such as flood protection and wildlife habitat. Nepalese communities were surveyed to measure flows of forest products from their community forests. A stochastic frontier analysis shows that communities are not producing forest products efficiently and there is potential for improvement. The results shows that forest products benefit and environmental performance are associated products. In addition, analysis reveals that factors such as social capital, support from government and knowledge in management contributes positively to the production efficiency. It is anticipated that these findings will contribute to community forest policy redesign and consequently to the welfare of communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Chand, Narendra & Kerr, Geoffrey N. & Bigsby, Hugh R., "undated". "Why some community forests are performing better than others: a case of forest user groups in Nepal," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand 96827, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nzar10:96827
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.96827
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/96827/files/2010_7_why%20some%20community%20forests%20are%20performing%20better%20than%20others.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.96827?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. 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. Forsund, Finn R. & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1980. "A survey of frontier production functions and of their relationship to efficiency measurement," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 5-25, May.
    3. Agrawal, Arun, 2001. "Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1649-1672, October.
    4. Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 2000. "Halting Degradation of Natural Resources: Is There a Role for Rural Communities?," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198290612.
    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. Ondrich, Jan & Ruggiero, John, 2001. "Efficiency measurement in the stochastic frontier model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(2), pages 434-442, March.
    7. Rahman, Sanzidur, 2003. "Profit efficiency among Bangladeshi rice farmers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 487-503.
    8. 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.
    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. Tim J. Coelli, 1995. "Recent Developments In Frontier Modelling And Efficiency Measurement," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 39(3), pages 219-245, December.
    13. Kant, Shashi, 2000. "A dynamic approach to forest regimes in developing economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 287-300, February.
    14. 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.
    15. Bernhard Brümmer, 2001. "Estimating confidence intervals for technical efficiency: the case of private farms in slovenia," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 28(3), pages 285-306, October.
    16. 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.
    17. Laure Latruffe & Kelvin Balcombe & Sophia Davidova & Katarzyna Zawalinska, 2005. "Technical and scale efficiency of crop and livestock farms in Poland : does specialization matte r?," Post-Print hal-02392195, HAL.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.
    22. Arun Agrawal & Gautam Yadama, 1997. "How do Local Institutions Mediate Market and Population Pressures on Resources? Forest Panchayats in Kumaon, India," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 28(3), pages 435-465, July.
    23. 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.
    24. Bigsby, Hugh R., 1994. "Production Structure And The Australian Sawmilling Industry," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 38(3), pages 1-18, December.
    25. Bardhan, Pranab, 1993. "Analytics of the institutions of informal cooperation in rural development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 633-639, April.
    26. 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.
    27. 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(1), pages 129-148, February.
    28. 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.
    29. 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.
    30. S. Kumar & S. SurnameCorbridge, 2002. "Programmed to Fail? Development Projects and the Politics of Participation," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 73-103.
    31. William W. Cooper & Lawrence M. Seiford & Kaoru Tone, 2006. "Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and Its Uses," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-0-387-29122-2, December.
    32. 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.
    33. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2015. "Efficiency of the banking system in Vietnam under financial liberalization," OSF Preprints qsf6d, Center for Open Science.
    5. Behera, Bhagirath, 2009. "Explaining the performance of state-community joint forest management in India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 177-185, November.
    6. Tewathia, Nidhi, 2011. "Heterogeneity in Common Property Resource Management and its Implications," MPRA Paper 64010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Sullivan, Abigail & York, Abigail M. & An, Li & Yabiku, Scott T. & Hall, Sharon J., 2017. "How does perception at multiple levels influence collective action in the commons? The case of Mikania micrantha in Chitwan, Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1-10.
    8. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2011. "Gendered effects of work and participation in collective forest management," MPRA Paper 31091, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Okumu, Boscow & Muchapondwa, Edwin, 2020. "Determinants of successful collective management of forest resources: Evidence from Kenyan Community Forest Associations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    10. Rai, Chandra & Bigsby, Hugh R. & MacDonald, Ian, 2010. "Small forests, big ambitions and a hard reality - Community Forestry in Nepal," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand 96833, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. 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.
    12. Su, Yiqing & Araral, Eduardo & Wang, Yahua, 2020. "The effects of farmland use rights trading and labor outmigration on the governance of the irrigation commons: Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    13. L. Jamila Haider & Benjamin Neusel & Garry D. Peterson & Maja Schlüter, 2019. "Past management affects success of current joint forestry management institutions in Tajikistan," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 2183-2224, October.
    14. Puig-Junoy, Jaume & Argiles, Josep M., 2004. "The influence of management accounting use on farm inefficiency," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, August.
    15. Gebremedhin, Berhanu & Pender, John & Tesfay, Girmay, 2004. "Collective action for grazing land management in crop-livestock mixed systems in the highlands of northern Ethiopia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 273-290, December.
    16. Dash, Madhusmita & Behera, Bhagirath, 2015. "Local institutions, collective action and forest conservation: The case of Similipal Tiger Reserve in India," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 167-184.
    17. 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.
    18. Chirwa Ephraim W., 2007. "Sources of Technical Efficiency among Smallholder Maize Farmers in Southern Malawi," Working Papers 172, African Economic Research Consortium, Research Department.
    19. 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.
    20. Kalyan Chakraborty & Basudeb Biswas & W. Cris Lewis, 2001. "Measurement of Technical Efficiency in Public Education: A Stochastic and Nonstochastic Production Function Approach," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 67(4), pages 889-905, April.

    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:nzar10:96827. 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/nzareea.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.