IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v128y2021ics1389934121000836.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors influencing sustainability of traditional village groves (Maeulsoop) in Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Kweon, Deogkyu
  • Youn, Yeo-Chang

Abstract

This study examines the sustainability of traditional village groves (Maeulsoop), forest commons, in South Korea, and investigates factors influencing their sustainability. We assessed the socio-economic functions and ecological conditions of twenty-four village groves in Namwon City, South Korea, and evaluated the sustainability of these village groves. Variables (ownership, self-governance, forest size and location, and village population) were selected based on the social-ecological systems framework, and the influence of these variables on the sustainability of village groves was examined. Out of the twenty-four village groves studied, three (12.5%) turned out to be sustainable with the socio-economic functions maintained and in a healthy state, eight (33.3%) were unsustainable with some of socio-economic functions lost and in an unhealthy state, and thirteen (54.2%) were in a tradeoff state between socio-economic functions and ecological health. Positive relationships between sustainability and the ownership of village groves and the existence of a self-governing management body in villages were observed. This result suggests that when villages own their groves and/or villages have the self-governance, village groves tend to be more sustainable. In addition, forest size, village population, and distance to village center are correlated to the sustainability of village groves. Larger village groves still play a role as a windbreak or flood bank and are more ecologically resilient than smaller groves. Depopulation has led to a lack of labor force that can manage village groves, and village groves located far from villages are less accessible for use by villagers, and thus can be left and neglected without proper monitoring and management. Considering the recent trend of rural depopulation and privatization of commons, this study suggests that collaborations among villages and organizations outside villages are necessary to restore the governance systems and sustainably manage village groves.

Suggested Citation

  • Kweon, Deogkyu & Youn, Yeo-Chang, 2021. "Factors influencing sustainability of traditional village groves (Maeulsoop) in Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:128:y:2021:i:c:s1389934121000836
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102477
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934121000836
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102477?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 & 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. Jeanty, Pierre Wilner & Kraybill, David S. & Libby, Lawrence W. & Sohngen, Brent, 2002. "Effects Of Local Development Pressure On Land Prices: A Spatial Economic Approach," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19767, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Abhilas Pradhan & Rabinarayan Patra, 2013. "Heterogeneity, collective action and management sustainability in common property forest resources: case study from the Indian state Odisha," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 979-997, August.
    4. Prashanth Ballullaya, U. & Reshmi, K.S. & Rajesh, T.P. & Manoj, K. & Lowman, Margaret & Allesh Sinu, Palatty, 2019. "Stakeholder motivation for the conservation of sacred groves in south India: An analysis of environmental perceptions of rural and urban neighbourhood communities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Luintel, Harisharan & Bluffstone, Randall A. & Scheller, Robert M., 2018. "An assessment of collective action drivers of carbon storage in Nepalese forest commons," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 39-47.
    6. Eric A. Coleman & Scott S. Liebertz, 2014. "Property Rights and Forest Commons," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 649-668, June.
    7. Adhikari, Sunit & Kingi, Tanira & Ganesh, Siva, 2014. "Incentives for community participation in the governance and management of common property resources: the case of community forest management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-9.
    8. Soe, Khaing Thandar & Yeo-Chang, YOUN, 2019. "Perceptions of forest-dependent communities toward participation in forest conservation: A case study in Bago Yoma, South-Central Myanmar," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 129-141.
    9. Arun Agrawal & Elinor Ostrom, 2001. "Collective Action, Property Rights, and Decentralization in Resource Use in India and Nepal," Politics & Society, , vol. 29(4), pages 485-514, December.
    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. Jagger, Pamela, 2014. "Confusion vs. clarity: Property rights and forest use in Uganda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 32-41.
    2. Soe, Khaing Thandar & Yeo-Chang, YOUN, 2019. "Perceptions of forest-dependent communities toward participation in forest conservation: A case study in Bago Yoma, South-Central Myanmar," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 129-141.
    3. Vélez, Maria Alejandra & Robalino, Juan & Cardenas, Juan Camilo & Paz, Andrea & Pacay, Eduardo, 2020. "Is collective titling enough to protect forests? Evidence from Afro-descendant communities in the Colombian Pacific region," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    4. Madrigal, Róger & Alpízar, Francisco & Schlüter, Achim, 2010. "Determinants of Performance of Drinking-Water Community Organizations: A Comparative Analysis of Case Studies in Rural Costa Rica," RFF Working Paper Series dp-10-03-efd, Resources for the Future.
    5. Peña, Ximena & Vélez, María Alejandra & Cárdenas, Juan Camilo & Perdomo, Natalia & Matajira, Camilo, 2017. "Collective Property Leads to Household Investments: Lessons From Land Titling in Afro-Colombian Communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 27-48.
    6. Adhikari, Sunit & Kingi, Tanira & Ganesh, Siva, 2014. "Incentives for community participation in the governance and management of common property resources: the case of community forest management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-9.
    7. Meina Cai & Ilia Murtazashvili & Jennifer Murtazashvili & Raufhon Salahodjaev, 2020. "Individualism and governance of the commons," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 175-195, July.
    8. 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.
    9. Myers, Rodd & Fisher, Micah & Monterroso, Iliana & Liswanti, Nining & Maryudi, Ahmad & Larson, Anne M. & Mwangi, Esther & Herawati, Tuti, 2022. "Coordinating forest tenure reform: Objectives, resources and relations in Indonesia, Kenya, Nepal, Peru, and Uganda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    10. Rahman, H.M. Tuihedur & Hickey, Gordon M. & Sarker, Swapan Kumar, 2012. "A framework for evaluating collective action and informal institutional dynamics under a resource management policy of decentralization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 32-41.
    11. 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.
    12. Rajesh Bista & Sophia Graybill & Qi Zhang & Richard E. Bilsborrow & Conghe Song, 2023. "Influence of Rural Out-Migration on Household Participation in Community Forest Management? Evidence from the Middle Hills of Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Dang, Thi Kim Phung & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Arts, Bas, 2018. "Forest devolution in Vietnam: From rhetoric to performance," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 760-774.
    14. Brendan Coolsaet & Neil Dawson & Florian Rabitz & Simone Lovera, 0. "Access and allocation in global biodiversity governance: a review," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-17.
    15. Brendan Coolsaet & Neil Dawson & Florian Rabitz & Simone Lovera, 2020. "Access and allocation in global biodiversity governance: a review," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 359-375, June.
    16. Thi Kim Phung Dang & Ingrid J. Visseren-Hamakers & Bas Arts, 2017. "The Institutional Capacity for Forest Devolution: The Case of Forest Land Allocation in Vietnam," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 35(6), pages 723-744, November.
    17. Frederike Klümper & Insa Theesfeld, 2017. "The Land–Water–Food Nexus: Expanding the Social–Ecological System Framework to Link Land and Water Governance," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16, July.
    18. 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.
    19. Yin, Runsheng, 2016. "Empirical linkages between devolved tenure systems and forest conditions: An introduction to the literature review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 271-276.
    20. 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.

    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:forpol:v:128:y:2021:i:c:s1389934121000836. 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/forpol .

    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.