IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v193y2022ics0921800921003359.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Barriers to Sustainable Forest Management: Evidence from an Experimental Study in Tajikistan

Author

Listed:
  • Kasymov, Ulan
  • Wang, Xiaoxi
  • Zikos, Dimitrios
  • Chopan, Massih
  • Ibele, Benedikt

Abstract

Joint Forest Management (JFM) is a form of participatory forest governance that aims for protection, conservation and sustainable use of forest resources by involving local communities. The JFM reforms have been promoted to address forest and land degradation, as vital in reducing institutional uncertainty in complex environments and strengthening cooperation among resource users. We draw on theories of collective action and transaction costs assuming that the overharvesting problem can be reduced by efficient and effective rules that support cooperation between forest users in using common pool resources at the group level and explore how forest users respond to policies that aim to reduce overharvesting in Tajikistan. To this end, we used a framed field experiment involving actual forest resource users. We find a strong impact of rules and the associated transaction costs in dealing with environmental and institutional uncertainties. The experiment results indicate that the harvesting rate is likely to decrease when institutionalized mechanisms are introduced to coordinate the interdependence among resource users. The overall results suggest that the rule determining harvest on a rotational basis is effective in reducing harvesting under environmental uncertainty regardless of the existence of communication and under institutional uncertainty when communication is permitted.

Suggested Citation

  • Kasymov, Ulan & Wang, Xiaoxi & Zikos, Dimitrios & Chopan, Massih & Ibele, Benedikt, 2022. "Institutional Barriers to Sustainable Forest Management: Evidence from an Experimental Study in Tajikistan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:193:y:2022:i:c:s0921800921003359
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107276
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800921003359
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107276?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
    ---><---

    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. Edella Schlager & William Blomquist & Shui Yan Tang, 1994. "Mobile Flows, Storage, and Self-Organized Institutions for Governing Common-Pool Resources," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(3), pages 294-317.
    2. Eric A. Coleman, 2009. "Institutional factors affecting biophysical outcomes in forest management," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 122-146.
    3. Juan-Camilo Cardenas & Marco Janssen & Francois Bousquet, 2013. "Dynamics of rules and resources: three new field experiments on water, forests and fisheries," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 11, pages 319-345, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Cardenas, Juan-Camilo, 2004. "Norms from outside and from inside: an experimental analysis on the governance of local ecosystems," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 229-241, June.
    5. Wang, Xiaoxi & Biewald, Anne & Dietrich, Jan Philipp & Schmitz, Christoph & Lotze-Campen, Hermann & Humpenöder, Florian & Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon & Popp, Alexander, 2016. "Taking account of governance: Implications for land-use dynamics, food prices, and trade patterns," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-24.
    6. 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.
    7. Cardenas, Juan-Camilo & Ostrom, Elinor, 2004. "What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-326, December.
    8. Cardenas, Juan Camilo & Carpenter, Jeffrey, 2013. "Risk attitudes and economic well-being in Latin America," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 52-61.
    9. Otto, Ilona M. & Wechsung, Frank, 2014. "The effects of rules and communication in a behavioral irrigation experiment with power asymmetries carried out in North China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 10-20.
    10. Janssen, Marco A. & Bousquet, François & Cardenas, Juan-Camilo & Castillo, Daniel & Worrapimphong, Kobchai, 2013. "Breaking the elected rules in a field experiment on forestry resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 132-139.
    11. Krister P. Andersson & Nathan J. Cook & Tara Grillos & Maria Claudia Lopez & Carl F. Salk & Glenn D. Wright & Esther Mwangi, 2018. "Experimental evidence on payments for forest commons conservation," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(3), pages 128-135, March.
    12. Anastassios Karayiannis & Aristides Hatzis, 2012. "Morality, social norms and the rule of law as transaction cost-saving devices: the case of ancient Athens," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 621-643, June.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:6:p:511-537 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Jonah Busch & Irene Ring & Monique Akullo & Oyut Amarjargal & Maud Borie & Rodrigo S. Cassola & Annabelle Cruz-Trinidad & Nils Droste & Joko Tri Haryanto & Ulan Kasymov & Nataliia Viktorivna Kotenko &, 2021. "A global review of ecological fiscal transfers," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 4(9), pages 756-765, September.
    15. Wang, Xiaoxi & Dietrich, Jan P. & Lotze-Campen, Hermann & Biewald, Anne & Stevanović, Miodrag & Bodirsky, Benjamin L. & Brümmer, Bernhard & Popp, Alexander, 2020. "Beyond land-use intensity: Assessing future global crop productivity growth under different socioeconomic pathways," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    16. Lan T. Pham & Ilona M. Otto & Dimitrios Zikos, 2019. "Self-Governance and the Effects of Rules in Irrigation Systems: Evidence from Laboratory and Framed Field Experiments in China, India and Vietnam," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(01), pages 1-28, January.
    17. World Bank, 2014. "Assessment of Household Energy Deprivation in Tajikistan : Policy Options for Socially Responsible Reform in the Energy Sector," World Bank Publications - Reports 18732, The World Bank Group.
    18. Gerring, John, 2004. "What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 341-354, May.
    19. Juan Cardenas, 2011. "Social Norms and Behavior in the Local Commons as Seen Through the Lens of Field Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 451-485, March.
    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. Amadu, Festus O. & Miller, Daniel C., 2024. "The impact of forest product collection and processing on household income in rural Liberia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Feng, Xiaolong & Qiu, Huanguang & Liu, Mingyue & Tang, Jianjun, 2024. "Innovation of grassland ecological governance systems: Synergy between government regulation and grassroots governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).

    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. Blanco, Esther & Lopez, Maria Claudia & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio, 2015. "Exogenous degradation in the commons: Field experimental evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 430-439.
    2. Janssen, Marco A. & Bousquet, François & Cardenas, Juan-Camilo & Castillo, Daniel & Worrapimphong, Kobchai, 2013. "Breaking the elected rules in a field experiment on forestry resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 132-139.
    3. Chávez, Carlos A. & Murphy, James J. & Stranlund, John K., 2018. "Managing and defending the commons: Experimental evidence from TURFs in Chile," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 229-246.
    4. Röttgers, Dirk, 2016. "Conditional cooperation, context and why strong rules work — A Namibian common-pool resource experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 21-31.
    5. Gatiso, Tsegaye T. & Vollan, Björn & Nuppenau, Ernst-August, 2015. "Resource scarcity and democratic elections in commons dilemmas: An experiment on forest use in Ethiopia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 199-207.
    6. Schill, Caroline & Rocha, Juan Carlos, 2023. "Sustaining local commons in the face of uncertain ecological thresholds: Evidence from a framed field experiment with Colombian small-scale fishers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    7. d'Adda, Giovanna, 2011. "Social Status and Influence: Evidence from an Artefactual Field Experiment on Local Public Good Provision," Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Berlin 2011 22, Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics.
    8. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad & Angelsen, Arild, 2015. "Experimental tests of tropical forest conservation measures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 346-359.
    9. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Vostroknutov, Alexander, 2015. "The social and ecological determinants of common pool resource sustainability," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 38-53.
    10. Singh, Vijai Shanker & Pandey, Deep Narayan & Prakash, Neha Pandey, 2011. "What determines the success of joint forest management? Science-based lessons on sustainable governance of forests in India," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 126-133.
    11. Ngoma, Hambulo & Hailu, Amare Teklay & Kabwe, Stephen & Angelsen, Arild, 2020. "Pay, talk or ‘whip’ to conserve forests: Framed field experiments in Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    12. Juan-Camilo Cardenas & Marco Janssen & Francois Bousquet, 2013. "Dynamics of rules and resources: three new field experiments on water, forests and fisheries," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 11, pages 319-345, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polania-Reyes, 2012. "Economic Incentives and Social Preferences: Substitutes or Complements?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(2), pages 368-425, June.
    14. Samuel Bowles & Sandra Polania-Reyes, 2011. "Economic incentives and social preferences: substitutes or complements?," Department of Economics University of Siena 617, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    15. Jan Stoop & Charles N. Noussair & Daan van Soest, 2012. "From the Lab to the Field: Cooperation among Fishermen," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 120(6), pages 1027-1056.
    16. Ibanez, Marcela & Martinsson, Peter, 2008. "Can we do policy recommendations from a framed field experiment? The case of coca cultivation in Colombia," Working Papers in Economics 306, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    17. Raja R Timilsina & Yutaka Kobayashi & Koji Kotani, 2022. "Non-kinship successors for resource sustainability," Working Papers SDES-2022-2, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jan 2022.
    18. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2018. "The importance of Ostrom’s Design Principles: Youth group performance in northern Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 10-30.
    19. Narloch, Ulf & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G., 2012. "Collective Action Dynamics under External Rewards: Experimental Insights from Andean Farming Communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 2096-2107.
    20. Rommel, Jens & Anggraini, Eva, 2018. "Spatially explicit framed field experiments on ecosystem services governance," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 201-205.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:193:y:2022:i:c:s0921800921003359. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.