IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/inseej/343176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Assignment of Individual Property Rights Improve Forest Conservation Outcomes? Empirical Evidence from West Bengal, India

Author

Listed:
  • Chand, Sandip
  • Behera, Bhagirath

Abstract

The past few decades have seen significant changes in the governance of forests in India. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Rights on Forest) Act (FRA), 2006, was a landmark act passed in the Indian Parliament to assign individual property rights over forest resources that have been de facto used by local communities. This paper examines whether the assignment of individual property rights results in positive outcomes for forest conservation using village-level forest patta (forest land title) and census data from Bankura district in West Bengal. Vegetation Continuous Fields data has been used to measure the change in forest cover from 2006 to 2012. The results show that the percentage of forest patta land in the village, distance to markets, the existence of pucca roads, and the presence of forest protection committees (FPCs) are negatively and significantly related to forest degradation, implying improvement in forest conservation outcomes. The presence of tribal people, a larger population, and higher literacy rate are positively associated with forest degradation, meaning that they have an undesirable impact on forest conservation outcomes. The findings of this study strongly suggest that the assignment of individual property rights to both the Scheduled Tribes (STs) living in the forest and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs) under the FRA, 2006, tends to improve forest conservation outcomes. Hence, it is suggested that the distribution of individual forest rights (IFRs) under the FRA may further improve forest conservation outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Chand, Sandip & Behera, Bhagirath, 2023. "Does Assignment of Individual Property Rights Improve Forest Conservation Outcomes? Empirical Evidence from West Bengal, India," Ecology, Economy and Society - the INSEE Journal, Indian Society of Ecological Economics (INSEE), vol. 6(02), July.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:inseej:343176
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.343176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/343176/files/Does%20Assignment%20of%20Individual.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.343176?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. Agrawal, Arun, 2001. "Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1649-1672, October.
    2. Nerfa, Lauren & Rhemtulla, Jeanine M. & Zerriffi, Hisham, 2020. "Forest dependence is more than forest income: Development of a new index of forest product collection and livelihood resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Dradjad H. Wibowo & R. Neil Byron, 1999. "Deforestation mechanisms: a survey," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 26(1/2/3), pages 455-474, 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. Liu, Ziming & Rommel, Jens & Feng, Shuyi, 2018. "Does It Pay to Participate in Decision-making? Survey Evidence on Land Co-management in Jiangsu Province, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 199-209.
    2. Haque, A.B.M. Mahfuzul & Visser, Leontine E. & Dey, Madan M., 2011. "Institutional Arrangements in Seasonal Floodplain Management under Community-based Aquaculture in Bangladesh," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Poteete, Amy R. & Ostrom, Elinor, 2008. "Fifteen Years of Empirical Research on Collective Action in Natural Resource Management: Struggling to Build Large-N Databases Based on Qualitative Research," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 176-195, January.
    4. Roy, Anjan Kumer Dev & Alam, Khorshed & Gow, Jeff, 2012. "A review of the role of property rights and forest policies in the management of the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest in Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 46-53.
    5. Torpey-Saboe, Nichole & Andersson, Krister & Mwangi, Esther & Persha, Lauren & Salk, Carl & Wright, Glenn, 2015. "Benefit Sharing Among Local Resource Users: The Role of Property Rights," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 408-418.
    6. 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.
    7. Stefanie Engel & Charles Palmer & Alexander Pfaff, 2013. "On the Endogeneity of Resource Co-management: Theory and Evidence from Indonesia," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(2), pages 308-329.
    8. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2011. "Gendered effects of work and participation in collective forest management," MPRA Paper 31091, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Behera, Bhagirath, 2009. "Explaining the performance of state-community joint forest management in India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 177-185, November.
    10. Paudel, Jayash, 2018. "Community-Managed Forests, Household Fuelwood Use and Food Consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 62-73.
    11. Frey, Ulrich J. & Rusch, Hannes, 2014. "Modeling Ecological Success of Common Pool Resource Systems Using Large Datasets," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 93-103.
    12. Kusters, Koen & de Graaf, Maartje & Ascarrunz, Nataly & Benneker, Charlotte & Boot, René & van Kanten, Rudi & Livingstone, John & Maindo, Alphonse & Mendoza, Heidi & Purwanto, Edi & Rodríguez, Carlos , 2022. "Formalizing community forest tenure rights: A theory of change and conditions for success," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    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. Wenjun Li & Carol Kerven, 2024. "Between commons and anticommons: a nested common-private interface framework," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    15. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2013. "Legal exclusions, private wealth and livelihoods: An analysis of work time allocation in protected areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 82-91.
    16. Marcel Bursztyn & Luiz Antonio Ferraro Junior, 2008. "Managing the Remaining Commons: Challenges to Sustainability in the Brazilian Northeast," CID Working Papers 28, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    17. Ojha, Hemant & Persha, Lauren & Chhatre, Ashwini, 2009. "Community forestry in Nepal: a policy innovation for local livelihoods," IFPRI discussion papers 913, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Paudel, Jayash, 2016. "Community-Managed Forests and Household Welfare: Empirical Evidence from Nepal," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235481, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Tewathia, Nidhi, 2011. "Heterogeneity in Common Property Resource Management and its Implications," MPRA Paper 64010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Klümper, Frederike & Theesfeld, Insa, 2017. "The land-water-food nexus: expanding the social-ecological system framework to link land and water governance," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:inseej:343176. 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/inseeea.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.