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. Agrawal, Arun & Gibson, Clark C., 1999. "Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 629-649, April.
    2. 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.
    3. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    4. 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.
    5. F. L. Jones & Jonathan Kelley, 1984. "Decomposing Differences between Groups," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 12(3), pages 323-343, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Arbache, Jorge Saba & Carneiro, Francisco Galrao, 1999. "Unions and Interindustry Wage Differentials," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(10), pages 1875-1883, October.
    8. 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.
    9. Byron, Neil & Arnold, Michael, 1999. "What Futures for the People of the Tropical Forests?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 789-805, May.
    10. Barry T. Hirsch & Stephen L. Mehay, 2003. "Evaluating the Labor Market Performance of Veterans Using a Matched Comparison Group Design," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 38(3).
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. James Heckman, 1997. "Instrumental Variables: A Study of Implicit Behavioral Assumptions Used in Making Program Evaluations," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 32(3), pages 441-462.
    15. 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)

    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. 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.
    2. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Marco Caliendo & Sabine Kopeinig, 2008. "Some Practical Guidance For The Implementation Of Propensity Score Matching," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 31-72, February.
    4. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2009. "Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical Microeconomics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 44(3).
    5. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 2004. "The Determinants of Participation in a Social Program: Evidence from a Prototypical Job Training Program," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 243-298, April.
    6. Andersson, Fredrik W. & Holzer, Harry J. & Lane, Julia & Rosenblum, David & Smith, Jeffrey A., 2013. "Does Federally-Funded Job Training Work? Nonexperimental Estimates of WIA Training Impacts Using Longitudinal Data on Workers and Firms," IZA Discussion Papers 7621, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Lechner, Michael & Wunsch, Conny, 2013. "Sensitivity of matching-based program evaluations to the availability of control variables," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 111-121.
    8. Silke Hüttel & Simon Jetzinger & Martin Odening, 2014. "Forced Sales and Farmland Prices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(3), pages 395-410.
    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. 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.
    11. Jeffrey Smith, 2000. "A Critical Survey of Empirical Methods for Evaluating Active Labor Market Policies," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 136(III), pages 247-268, September.
    12. Gabrielle Wills, 2016. "Principal leadership changes in South Africa: Investigating their consequences for school performance," Working Papers 01/2016, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    13. Wills, Gabrielle, 2016. "Principal leadership changes and their consequences for school performance in South Africa," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 108-124.
    14. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    15. Sianesi, Barbara, 2017. "Evidence of randomisation bias in a large-scale social experiment: The case of ERA," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 198(1), pages 41-64.
    16. Reinowski, Eva & Schultz, Birgit & Wiemers, Jürgen, 2004. "Evaluation of Further Training Programmes in Saxony from 1989 to 2001," IWH Discussion Papers 188/2004, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH), revised 2004.
    17. Hartmut Lehmann & Jochen Kluve, 2010. "Assessing Active Labour Market Policies in Transition Economies," AIEL Series in Labour Economics, in: Floro Ernesto Caroleo & Francesco Pastore (ed.), The Labour Market Impact of the EU Enlargement. A New Regional Geography of Europe?, edition 1, chapter 11, pages 275-307, AIEL - Associazione Italiana Economisti del Lavoro.
    18. Mario Liebensteiner, 2014. "Estimating the Income Gain of Seasonal Labor Migration," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 667-680, November.
    19. Martin Biewen & Bernd Fitzenberger & Aderonke Osikominu & Marie Paul, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Public-Sponsored Training Revisited: The Importance of Data and Methodological Choices," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(4), pages 837-897.
    20. Richard Dorsett, 2004. "The new deal for young people: effect of the options on the labour market status of young men," PSI Research Discussion Series 7, Policy Studies Institute, UK.

    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.

    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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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.