IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v146y2024ics0264837724002023.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impacts of buffer zone policy on household income: Evidence from Chitwan National Park, Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Kandel, Pratikshya
  • Pandit, Ram
  • White, Benedict

Abstract

Providing incentives to local communities to mitigate negative impacts of protected areas is an important component of conservation policy. Incentives may take various forms, including direct payments and income diversification training. For a case study of Chitwan National Park in Nepal, we evaluate the welfare effects of incentives delivered to buffer zone communities in the form of income diversification training. Evidence on the effect of such incentives on household welfare is limited. We evaluated the welfare effects in two ways. First, we measure the economic effects of living within the buffer zone, and second, we evaluate the effectiveness of two training interventions namely, income-generating training and tourism development training on increasing household income. We surveyed 728 households and used a quasi-experimental method (Propensity Score Matching). Results suggest that households living inside the buffer zone have 19 percent higher per capita household income than similar households living outside. Notably, income-generating training does not lead to an increase in household income, whereas tourism development training results in a substantial 52 percent growth. Our findings from Chitwan National Park suggest that conservation efforts do not necessarily adversely affect local communities. Interventions such as training programs can increase income, but are most effective when they allow households to take advantage of economic activities, such as tourism, linked to a protected area. This highlights the importance of crafting well-designed and targeted policy interventions that simultaneously enhance conservation goals and benefit local people.

Suggested Citation

  • Kandel, Pratikshya & Pandit, Ram & White, Benedict, 2024. "Impacts of buffer zone policy on household income: Evidence from Chitwan National Park, Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:146:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724002023
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107249
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837724002023
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107249?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. Bauch, Simone C. & Sills, Erin O. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K., 2014. "Have We Managed to Integrate Conservation and Development? ICDP Impacts in the Brazilian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 135-148.
    2. Joel Heinen & Suresh Shrestha, 2006. "Evolving policies for conservation: An Historical Profile of the Protected Area System of Nepal," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(1), pages 41-58.
    3. Vedeld, Paul & Jumane, Abdallah & Wapalila, Gloria & Songorwa, Alexander, 2012. "Protected areas, poverty and conflicts," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 20-31.
    4. Kandel, Pratikshya & Pandit, Ram & White, Benedict & Polyakov, Maksym, 2022. "Do protected areas increase household income? Evidence from a Meta-Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Musinguzi, Peter & Bosselmann, Aske Skovmand & Pouliot, Mariève, 2018. "Livelihoods-conservation initiatives: Evidence of socio-economic impacts from organic honey production in Mwingi, Eastern Kenya," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 132-145.
    6. Marco Caliendo & Sabine Kopeinig, 2008. "Some Practical Guidance For The Implementation Of Propensity Score Matching," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 31-72, February.
    7. Santi Sanglestsawai & Roderick M. Rejesus & Jose M. Yorobe Jr., 2015. "Economic impacts of integrated pest management (IPM) farmer field schools (FFS): evidence from onion farmers in the Philippines," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(2), pages 149-162, March.
    8. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
    9. Marc F. Bellemare & Casey J. Wichman, 2020. "Elasticities and the Inverse Hyperbolic Sine Transformation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(1), pages 50-61, February.
    10. DiPrete, Thomas A. & Gangl, Markus, 2004. "Assessing bias in the estimation of causal effects: Rosenbaum bounds on matching estimators and instrumental variables estimation with imperfect instruments," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Labor Market Policy and Employment SP I 2004-101, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    11. Beauchamp, Emilie & Clements, Tom & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2018. "Assessing Medium-term Impacts of Conservation Interventions on Local Livelihoods in Northern Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 202-218.
    12. Sims, Katharine R.E., 2010. "Conservation and development: Evidence from Thai protected areas," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 94-114, September.
    13. Arild Aakvik, 2001. "Bounding a Matching Estimator: The Case of a Norwegian Training Program," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 63(1), pages 115-143, February.
    14. Aparna Howlader & Amy W. Ando, 2020. "Consequences of Protected Areas for Household Forest Extraction, Time Use, and Consumption: Evidence from Nepal," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 769-808, April.
    15. Clemént, Matthieu, 2011. "Remittances and Household Expenditure Patterns in Tajikistan: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis," Asian Development Review, Asian Development Bank, vol. 28(2), pages 58-87.
    16. Estifanos, Tafesse Kefyalew & Polyakov, Maksym & Pandit, Ram & Hailu, Atakelty & Burton, Michael, 2020. "The impact of protected areas on the rural households’ incomes in Ethiopia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    17. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2017. "The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 3-32, Spring.
    18. Richardson, Robert B. & Fernandez, Ana & Tschirley, David & Tembo, Gelson, 2012. "Wildlife Conservation in Zambia: Impacts on Rural Household Welfare," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 1068-1081.
    19. Yergeau, Marie-Eve, 2020. "Tourism and local welfare: A multilevel analysis in Nepal’s protected areas," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Huber, Martin & Lechner, Michael & Wunsch, Conny, 2013. "The performance of estimators based on the propensity score," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 1-21.
    21. Javier Montoya-Zumaeta & Eduardo Rojas & Sven Wunder, 2019. "Adding rewards to regulation: The impacts of watershed conservation on land cover and household wellbeing in Moyobamba, Peru," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, November.
    22. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, November.
    23. Asfaw, Solomon & Scognamillo, Antonio & Caprera, Gloria Di & Sitko, Nicholas & Ignaciuk, Adriana, 2019. "Heterogeneous impact of livelihood diversification on household welfare: Cross-country evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 278-295.
    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. Kandel, Pratikshya & Pandit, Ram & White, Benedict & Polyakov, Maksym, 2022. "Do protected areas increase household income? Evidence from a Meta-Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    2. Riccardo Turati, 2025. "Networks abroad and culture: global individual-level evidence," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 38(1), pages 1-42, March.
    3. Marco Caliendo & Stefan Tübbicke, 2019. "Do Start-Up Subsidies for the Unemployed Affect Participants’ Well-Being? A Rigorous Look at (Un-)Intended Consequences of Labor Market Policies," CEPA Discussion Papers 14, Center for Economic Policy Analysis.
    4. Erhardt, Eva Christine, 2017. "Microfinance beyond self-employment: Evidence for firms in Bulgaria," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 75-95.
    5. Delius, Antonia & Sterck, Olivier, 2024. "Cash transfers and micro-enterprise performance: Theory and quasi-experimental evidence from Kenya," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    6. Seng, Kimty, 2017. "Considering the Effects of Mobile Phones on Financial Inclusion in Cambodia," MPRA Paper 82225, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 27 Oct 2017.
    7. Marco Caliendo & Stefan Tübbicke, 2020. "New evidence on long-term effects of start-up subsidies: matching estimates and their robustness," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(4), pages 1605-1631, October.
    8. Jawid, Asadullah & Khadjavi, Menusch, 2019. "Adaptation to climate change in Afghanistan: Evidence on the impact of external interventions," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 64-82.
    9. Do Xuan Luan, 2015. "Microcredit and Poverty Reduction: A Case Study of Microfinance Fund for Community Development in Northern Vietnam," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 7(8), pages 1-44, July.
    10. Blackman, Allen & Naranjo, Maria A., 2012. "Does eco-certification have environmental benefits? Organic coffee in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 58-66.
    11. Caliendo, Marco & Mahlstedt, Robert & Mitnik, Oscar A., 2017. "Unobservable, but unimportant? The relevance of usually unobserved variables for the evaluation of labor market policies," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 14-25.
    12. Jeffrey Smith & Arthur Sweetman, 2016. "Viewpoint: Estimating the causal effects of policies and programs," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(3), pages 871-905, August.
    13. Balaine, Lorraine & Dillon, Emma J. & Läpple, Doris & Lynch, John, 2020. "Can technology help achieve sustainable intensification? Evidence from milk recording on Irish dairy farms," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    14. Guerguil, Martine & Mandon, Pierre & Tapsoba, René, 2017. "Flexible fiscal rules and countercyclical fiscal policy," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 189-220.
    15. Matthew A. Masten & Alexandre Poirier & Linqi Zhang, 2024. "Assessing Sensitivity to Unconfoundedness: Estimation and Inference," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 1-13, January.
    16. Jens Ruhose & Stephan L. Thomsen & Insa Weilage, 2018. "The Wider Benefits of Adult Learning: Work-Related Training and Social Capital," CESifo Working Paper Series 7268, CESifo.
    17. Liane Faltermeier & Awudu Abdulai, 2009. "The impact of water conservation and intensification technologies: empirical evidence for rice farmers in Ghana," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 365-379, May.
    18. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    19. Becerril, Javier & Abdulai, Awudu, 2010. "The Impact of Improved Maize Varieties on Poverty in Mexico: A Propensity Score-Matching Approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1024-1035, July.
    20. Goller, Daniel & Lechner, Michael & Moczall, Andreas & Wolff, Joachim, 2020. "Does the estimation of the propensity score by machine learning improve matching estimation? The case of Germany's programmes for long term unemployed," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(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:lauspo:v:146:y:2024:i:c:s0264837724002023. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.