IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v33y2013icp47-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using a multilevel approach to analyse the case of forest conflicts in the Terai, Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Satyal Pravat, Poshendra
  • Humphreys, David

Abstract

Recent years have witnessed an intensification of forest-related conflicts between various stakeholders in Nepal, particularly between the state and local people, over the control, management and use of forests in the southern plains of the Terai. This paper analyses the multiple dimensions of conflicts in Terai forestry policy and practice using a multilevel approach. Multilevel forest conflicts in the Terai are explained as a nested concept, existing at different overlapping levels (ranging from the global level to households). At one pole, Terai forestry can be understood in terms of conflicts of interest between Nepal's national concerns for development and global concerns for environmental protection. At the other pole, access to and control of lands and forests and opportunities for participation in a family environment (intra-household and interpersonal levels) are based on inequalities of gender (male domination of women) or age (family head or older members prevailing over younger family members). In between the two poles of global and household levels are other identifiable levels of conflict in Terai forestry: state versus community; inter-community (between various groups); and intra-community conflicts (along dimensions of class, caste, ethnicity, gender, religion, and age). This paper situates and applies the idea of multiple levels of conflict to various dominant regimes of forest management in the Terai and argues that the issue of land and forest control, and hence dimensions of forest conflicts in the Terai, are not only an issue of global–state–community conflict, but are also driven by undercurrents of ethnicity (e.g. hill-origin versus plain-origin people), migrants versus indigenous groups (inter-community conflict), and other intra-community differences. In so doing, the paper develops and applies a multilevel analytical approach to understand how different governance regimes influence, and are influenced by, social heterogeneity and conflict across multiple scales. It is argued that methodologically the multilevel approach outlined in this paper can be used as a comprehensive framework in the analysis of complex issues of forest and land use conflict elsewhere.

Suggested Citation

  • Satyal Pravat, Poshendra & Humphreys, David, 2013. "Using a multilevel approach to analyse the case of forest conflicts in the Terai, Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 47-55.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:33:y:2013:i:c:p:47-55
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.09.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934112002249
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.09.013?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. Gautam, Krishna H., 2006. "Forestry, politicians and power--perspectives from Nepal's forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 175-182, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Pokharel, Ridish K., 2012. "Factors influencing the management regime of Nepal's community forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 13-17.
    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. 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.
    2. Wiederkehr, Charlotte & Ide, Tobias & Seppelt, Ralf & Hermans, Kathleen, 2022. "It’s all about politics: Migration and resource conflicts in the global south," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    3. Wang, Weiye & Zhai, Daye & Li, Xinyang & Fang, Haowen & Yang, Yuanyuan, 2024. "Conflicts in mangrove protected areas through the actor-centred power framework - Insights from China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    4. Ojha, Hemant R. & Ford, Rebecca & Keenan, Rodney J. & Race, Digby & Carias Vega, Dora & Baral, Himlal & Sapkota, Prativa, 2016. "Delocalizing Communities: Changing Forms of Community Engagement in Natural Resources Governance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 274-290.
    5. Lacuna-Richman, Celeste & Devkota, Bishnu P. & Richman, Mark A., 2016. "Users' priorities for good governance in community forestry: Two cases from Nepal's Terai Region," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 69-78.
    6. Rai, Rajesh Kumar & Dhakal, Arun & Khadayat, Madan S. & Ranabhat, Sunita, 2017. "Is collaborative forest management in Nepal able to provide benefits to distantly located users?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 156-161.
    7. Zachrisson, Anna & Beland Lindahl, Karin, 2013. "Conflict resolution through collaboration: Preconditions and limitations in forest and nature conservation controversies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 39-46.
    8. Paudel, Naya S. & Vedeld, Paul O. & Khatri, Dil B., 2015. "Prospects and challenges of tenure and forest governance reform in the context of REDD+ initiatives in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1-8.

    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. Lund, Jens Friis & Baral, Keshab & Bhandari, Nirmala Singh & Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Larsen, Helle Overgaard & Nielsen, Øystein Juul & Puri, Lila & Rutt, Rebecca Leigh & Treue, Thorsten, 2014. "Who benefits from taxation of forest products in Nepal's community forests?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 119-125.
    2. Pokharel, Ridish K. & Neupane, Prem Raj & Tiwari, Krishna Raj & Köhl, Michael, 2015. "Assessing the sustainability in community based forestry: A case from Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 75-84.
    3. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    4. 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.
    5. Chunying Ning & Rajan Subedi & Lu Hao, 2023. "Land Use/Cover Change, Fragmentation, and Driving Factors in Nepal in the Last 25 Years," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Clare, Stephen M. & Ruiz-Jaen, Maria C. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2019. "Assessing the potential of community-based forestry programs in Panama," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 81-92.
    8. Keijiro Otsuka & Ridish Pokharel, 2014. "In search of appropriate institutions for forest management," GRIPS Discussion Papers 13-25, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    9. Toft, Maja Nastasia Juul & Adeyeye, Yemi & Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "The use and usefulness of inventory-based management planning to forest management: Evidence from community forestry in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 35-49.
    10. Dey, Anamika & Singh, Gurdeep & Gupta, Anil K., 2018. "Women and Climate Stress: Role Reversal from Beneficiaries to Expert Participants," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 336-359.
    11. Robinson, Elizabeth J.Z. & Albers, Heidi J. & Ngeleza, Guyslain & Lokina, Razack B., 2014. "Insiders, outsiders, and the role of local enforcement in forest management: An example from Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 242-248.
    12. Maryudi, Ahmad & Citraningtyas, Erlita R. & Purwanto, Ris H. & Sadono, Ronggo & Suryanto, Priyono & Riyanto, Slamet & Siswoko, Bowo D., 2016. "The emerging power of peasant farmers in the tenurial conflicts over the uses of state forestland in Central Java, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 70-75.
    13. Takahashi, Ryo & Todo, Yasuyuki, 2011. "Impact of Community Management on Forest Protection:Evidence from an Aid-Funded Project in Ethiopia," Working Papers 31, JICA Research Institute.
    14. St. Clair, Priscilla Cooke, 2016. "Community forest management, gender and fuelwood collection in rural Nepal," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 52-71.
    15. 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.
    16. Poudel, Narayan Raj & Fuwa, Nobuhiko & Otsuka, Keijiro, 2015. "The impacts of a community forestry program on forest conditions, management intensity and revenue generation in the Dang district of Nepal," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 259-281, April.
    17. Kramer, Daniel Boyd & Urquhart, Gerald & Schmitt, Kristen, 2009. "Globalization and the connection of remote communities: A review of household effects and their biodiversity implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2897-2909, October.
    18. Digambar Singh Dahal, 2014. "Status and Trends in Forests and Forestry Development in Nepal: Major Success and Constraints," International Journal of Sciences, Office ijSciences, vol. 3(05), pages 51-65, May.
    19. Caballero, Gonzalo, 2015. "Community-based forest management institutions in the Galician communal forests: A new institutional approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 347-356.
    20. Paudyal, Kiran & Baral, Himlal & Burkhard, Benjamin & Bhandari, Santosh P. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2015. "Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: Case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 81-92.

    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:33:y:2013:i:c:p:47-55. 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.