IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v49y2014icp57-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why and how to measure forest governance at local level: A set of indicators

Author

Listed:
  • Secco, Laura
  • Da Re, Riccardo
  • Pettenella, Davide Matteo
  • Gatto, Paola

Abstract

The methodologies and operational instruments for the assessment of forest governance are still under development. While there are some advanced initiatives focused on forest governance assessment at international/national scale, there are relatively few at local level. However, assessments of local forest governance would be useful for both policy-makers and practitioners. The paper presents and discusses an original set of indicators to measure the quality of forest governance at local administrative/spatial level and the method used to develop them. A draft list of indicators (mainly process-oriented) has been formulated with respect to seven governance key-dimensions (sustainability, efficiency, effectiveness, participation, transparency, accountability and capacity). This draft list has been tested in two pilot applications (data collection by means of questionnaires). The indicators, which include both dichotomous and continuous variables, can be standardized in a few composite indicators to provide concise information about governance performance. Despite some methodological limitations that need to be further explored, the final set of 78 indicators appears to be a simple and practicable assessment tool, that can be used either for external or internal evaluations. Additional tests are needed to consolidate the tool.

Suggested Citation

  • Secco, Laura & Da Re, Riccardo & Pettenella, Davide Matteo & Gatto, Paola, 2014. "Why and how to measure forest governance at local level: A set of indicators," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 57-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:57-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934113001615
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.006?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. Linda G. Morra Imas & Ray C. Rist, . "The Road to Results : Designing and Conducting Effective Development Evaluations," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 2699, September.
    2. Birolo, Linda & Secco, Laura & Da Re, Riccardo & Cesaro, Luca, 2012. "Multi-system governance within the EU rural development policy: a proposal for LAGs self-evaluation in the LEADER program," Politica Agricola Internazionale - International Agricultural Policy, Edizioni L'Informatore Agrario, vol. 2012(4), pages 1-17.
    3. Pettenella, Davide & Brotto, Lucio, 2012. "Governance features for successful REDD+ projects organization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 46-52.
    4. Veenman, Sietske & Liefferink, Duncan & Arts, Bas, 2009. "A short history of Dutch forest policy: The 'de-institutionalisation' of a policy arrangement," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 202-208, May.
    5. Pulzl, Helga & Rametsteiner, Ewald, 2002. "Grounding international modes of governance into National Forest Programmes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 259-268, December.
    6. Gibson, Clark C. & Ostrom, Elinor & Ahn, T. K., 2000. "The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 217-239, February.
    7. Win, Heijman & Milic, Branislav B. & Bogdanov, Natalija, 2011. "The “Rural-Sensitive Evaluation Model” for evaluation of local governments’ sensitivity to rural issues in Serbia," 122nd Seminar, February 17-18, 2011, Ancona, Italy 99417, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2010. "The worldwide governance indicators : methodology and analytical issues," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5430, The World Bank.
    9. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart, 2007. "On Measuring Governance: Framing Issues for Debate," MPRA Paper 8187, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Steve Rayner, 2010. "How to eat an elephant: a bottom-up approach to climate policy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 615-621, November.
    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. Nathan J. Bennett & Jessica Blythe & Andrés M. Cisneros-Montemayor & Gerald G. Singh & U. Rashid Sumaila, 2019. "Just Transformations to Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Degnet, M. & Wesseler, J. & Van Der Werf, E. & Ingram, V., 2018. "Do locals have a say? Local participation in governance of forest plantations in Tanzania and Mozambique," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277254, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    4. Butler, Megan & Current, Dean, 2021. "Relationship between community capitals and governance: The perspective of local actors in the Maya Biosphere Reserve," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    5. Nuesiri, Emmanuel O., 2022. "Good governance of local forest is neither easy nor cheap: Policy learning from Bimbia-Bonadikombo," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    6. Edwards, Peter & Velarde, Sandra J. & Sharma-Wallace, Lisa & Barnard, Tim & Pohatu, Pia & Warmenhoven, Tui & Porou, Tina & Harrison, Duncan & Dunningham, Andrew, 2018. "Forest scholars empowering communities: A case study from the East Coast of New Zealand," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 46-53.
    7. Hasyim, Zainuri & Laraswati, Dwi & Purwanto, Ris H. & Pratama, Andita A. & Maryudi, Ahmad, 2020. "Challenges facing independent monitoring networks in the Indonesian timber legality assurance system," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    8. Butler, Megan, 2021. "Analyzing community forest enterprises in the Maya Biosphere Reserve using a modified capitals framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    9. Marian Drăgoi & Veronica Toza, 2019. "Did Forestland Restitution Facilitate Institutional Amnesia? Some Evidence from Romanian Forest Policy," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena, 2016. "Exploring the interlinkages between governance and social capital: A dynamic model for forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 25-36.
    11. Toumbourou, Tessa, 2020. "Using a Delphi approach to identify the most efficacious interventions to improve Indonesia’s forest and land governance," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Mi Sun Park & Hyowon Lee, 2016. "Legal Opportunities for Public Participation in Forest Management in the Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-13, April.
    13. Fischer, Richard & Tamayo Cordero, Fabian & Ojeda Luna, Tatiana & Ferrer Velasco, Rubén & DeDecker, Maria & Torres, Bolier & Giessen, Lukas & Günter, Sven, 2021. "Interplay of governance elements and their effects on deforestation in tropical landscapes: Quantitative insights from Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    14. Schulz, Tobias & Lieberherr, Eva & Zabel, Astrid, 2018. "Network governance in national Swiss forest policy: Balancing effectiveness and legitimacy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 42-53.
    15. Yami, M. & Mekuria, Wolde, 2022. "Challenges in the governance of community-managed forests in Ethiopia: review," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 1-14(3):147.
    16. Nansikombi, Hellen & Fischer, Richard & Ferrer Velasco, Rubén & Lippe, Melvin & Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe & Kabwe, Gillian & Günter, Sven, 2020. "Can de facto governance influence deforestation drivers in the Zambian Miombo?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    17. Satyal, Poshendra, 2018. "Civil society participation in REDD+ and FLEGT processes: Case study analysis from Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia and the Republic of Congo," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 83-96.
    18. Adeyeye, Yemi & Hagerman, Shannon & Pelai, Ricardo, 2019. "Seeking procedural equity in global environmental governance: Indigenous participation and knowledge politics in forest and landscape restoration debates at the 2016 World Conservation Congress," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    19. Rodríguez-Piñeros, Sandra & Martínez-Cortés, Oscar & Villarraga-Flórez, Liz & Ruíz-Díaz, Alejandra, 2018. "Timber market actors' values on forest legislation: A case study from Colombia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 1-10.
    20. Sullivan, Abigail, 2022. "Bridging the divide between rural and urban community-based forestry: A bibliometric review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    21. Dacinia Crina Petrescu & Florina Bran & Carmen Valentina Radulescu & Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag, 2020. "Green Procurement through Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certification in the Private Sector. Perceptions and Willingness to Buy of Private Companies from Romania," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(53), pages 1-42, February.
    22. Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena & Da Re, Riccardo & Rogelja, Todora & Burlando, Catie & Vicentini, Kamini & Pettenella, Davide & Masiero, Mauro & Miller, David & Nijnjk, Maria, 2019. "Towards a method of evaluating social innovation in forest-dependent rural communities: First suggestions from a science-stakeholder collaboration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 9-22.
    23. Subhan Mollick, Abdus & Khalilur Rahman, Md. & Nabiul Islam Khan, Md. & Nazmus Sadath, Md., 2018. "Evaluation of good governance in a participatory forestry program: A case study in Madhupur Sal forests of Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 123-137.

    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. Elisa Ravazzoli & Cristina Dalla Torre & Riccardo Da Re & Valentino Marini Govigli & Laura Secco & Elena Górriz-Mifsud & Elena Pisani & Carla Barlagne & Antonio Baselice & Mohammed Bengoumi & Marijke , 2021. "Can Social Innovation Make a Change in European and Mediterranean Marginalized Areas? Social Innovation Impact Assessment in Agriculture, Fisheries, Forestry, and Rural Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, February.
    2. Arnouts, Rikke & van der Zouwen, Mariëlle & Arts, Bas, 2012. "Analysing governance modes and shifts — Governance arrangements in Dutch nature policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 43-50.
    3. Sud, Nikita, 2014. "Governing India’s Land," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 43-56.
    4. Kapeliushnikov, Rostislav & Kuznetsov, Andrei & Demina, Natalia & Kuznetsova, Olga, 2013. "Threats to security of property rights in a transition economy: An empirical perspective," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 245-264.
    5. Robert Costanza & Shuang Liu, 2014. "Ecosystem Services and Environmental Governance: Comparing China and the U.S," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 160-170, January.
    6. Rakesh Sambharya & Martina Musteen, 2014. "Institutional environment and entrepreneurship: An empirical study across countries," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 314-330, December.
    7. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    8. Grillitsch, Markus & Asheim, Björn & Fünfschilling, Lea & Kelmenson, Sophie & Lowe, Nichola & Lundquist, Karl Johan & Mahmoud, Yahia & Martynovich, Mikhail & Mattson, Pauline & Miörner, Johan & Nilsso, 2023. "Rescaling: An Analytical Lense to Study Economic and Industrial Shifts," Papers in Innovation Studies 2023/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    9. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
    10. Myint Moe Chit, 2018. "Political openness and the growth of small and medium enterprises: empirical evidence from transition economies," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 781-804, September.
    11. Haichao Fan & Xiang Gao, 2017. "Domestic Creditor Rights and External Private Debt," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(606), pages 2410-2440, November.
    12. Imam, M. & Jamasb, T. & Llorca, M. & Llorca, M., 2018. "Power Sector Reform and Corruption: Evidence from Electricity Industry in Sub-Saharan Africa," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1801, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    13. Raissa Sorgho & Isabel Mank & Moubassira Kagoné & Aurélia Souares & Ina Danquah & Rainer Sauerborn, 2020. "“We Will Always Ask Ourselves the Question of How to Feed the Family”: Subsistence Farmers’ Perceptions on Adaptation to Climate Change in Burkina Faso," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-25, October.
    14. Gamberger, Dragan & Smuc, Tomislav, 2013. "Good governance problems and recent financial crises in some EU countries," Economics Discussion Papers 2013-39, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    15. Arief Bustaman & Rina Indiastuti & B. Budiono & Titik Anas, 2022. "Quality of Indonesia’s domestic institutions and export performance in the era of global value chains," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 11(1), pages 1-29, December.
    16. Potrafke, Niklas, 2019. "Electoral cycles in perceived corruption: International empirical evidence," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 215-224.
    17. Uchenna Efobi & Simplice Asongu & Ibukun Beecroft, 2018. "Aid, Terrorism, and Foreign Direct Investment: Empirical Insight Conditioned on Corruption Control," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 610-630, October.
    18. Songfeng, Cai & Yaxiong, Zhang & Bo, Meng, 2014. "The Impact Analysis of TTIP on BRICs—based on dynamic GTAP model considering GVC," Conference papers 332528, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Sebastian Garmann, 2018. "God save the queen, god save us all? Monarchies and institutional quality," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 65(2), pages 186-204, May.
    20. Wu, Ji & Guo, Mengmeng & Chen, Minghua & Jeon, Bang Nam, 2019. "Market power and risk-taking of banks: Some semiparametric evidence from emerging economies," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).

    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:49:y:2014:i:c:p:57-71. 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.