IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v5y2016i3p27-d75874.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Forest Management Regimes on Deforestation in a Central Indian Dry Deciduous Forest Landscape

Author

Listed:
  • Shivani Agarwal

    (Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Royal Enclave, Sriramapura, Jakkur Post, Bengaluru 560 064, Karnataka, India
    Manipal University, Manipal, Udupi 576 104, Karnataka, India)

  • Harini Nagendra

    (School of Development, Azim Premji University, PES Institute of Technology Campus, Pixel Park, B Block, Electronics City, Beside Nice Road, Hosur Road, Bengaluru 560 100, Karnataka, India)

  • Rucha Ghate

    (International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, G.P.O. Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal)

Abstract

This research examines the impact of forest management regimes, with various degrees of restriction, on forest conservation in a dry deciduous Indian forest landscape. Forest change is mapped using Landsat satellite images from 1977, 1990, 1999, and 2011. The landscape studied has lost 1478 km 2 of dense forest cover between 1977 and 2011, with a maximum loss of 1002 km 2 of dense forest between 1977 and 1990. The number of protected forest areas has increased, concomitant with an increase in restrictions on forest access and use outside protected areas. Interviews with residents of 20 randomly selected villages indicate that in the absence of alternatives, rather than reducing their dependence on forests, communities appear to shift their use to other, less protected patches of forest. Pressure shifts seem to be taking place as a consequence of increasing protection, from within protected areas to forests outside, leading to the creation of protected but isolated forest islands within a matrix of overall deforestation, and increased conflict between local residents and forest managers. A broader landscape vision for forest management needs to be developed, that involves local communities with forest protection and enables their decision-making on forest management outside strict protected areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Shivani Agarwal & Harini Nagendra & Rucha Ghate, 2016. "The Influence of Forest Management Regimes on Deforestation in a Central Indian Dry Deciduous Forest Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-16, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:3:p:27-:d:75874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/3/27/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/3/27/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rajiv Chaturvedi & Ranjith Gopalakrishnan & Mathangi Jayaraman & Govindasamy Bala & N. Joshi & Raman Sukumar & N. Ravindranath, 2011. "Impact of climate change on Indian forests: a dynamic vegetation modeling approach," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 119-142, February.
    2. Shamama Afreen & Nitasha Sharma & Rajiv Chaturvedi & Ranjith Gopalakrishnan & N. Ravindranath, 2011. "Forest policies and programs affecting vulnerability and adaptation to climate change," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 177-197, February.
    3. Fleischman, Forrest D., 2014. "Why do Foresters Plant Trees? Testing Theories of Bureaucratic Decision-Making in Central India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 62-74.
    4. Vollan, Bjørn, 2008. "Socio-ecological explanations for crowding-out effects from economic field experiments in southern Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 560-573, 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. Sujoy Banerjee & Tuomo Kauranne & Mirja Mikkila, 2020. "Land Use Change and Wildlife Conservation—Case Analysis of LULC Change of Pench-Satpuda Wildlife Corridor in Madhya Pradesh, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-17, June.

    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. DeCaro, Daniel, 2021. "Codebook For Analyzing Content And Function Of Communication In Social-Ecological Dilemma Experiments," SocArXiv 856hm, Center for Open Science.
    2. 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.
    3. de Melo, Gioia & Piaggio, Matías, 2015. "The perils of peer punishment: Evidence from a common pool resource framed field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 376-393.
    4. Vainio, Annukka & Paloniemi, Riikka, 2014. "The complex role of attitudes toward science in pro-environmental consumption in the Nordic countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 18-27.
    5. Wegmann, J., 2018. "Addressing the institutional challenges of groundwater management in areas of rapid urbanization," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277268, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. 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).
    7. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 503-520.
    8. Hayo, Bernd & Vollan, Björn, 2012. "Group interaction, heterogeneity, rules, and co-operative behaviour: Evidence from a common-pool resource experiment in South Africa and Namibia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 9-28.
    9. Choden, Kunzang & Nitschke, Craig R. & Stewart, Stephen B. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2021. "The potential impacts of climate change on the distribution of key tree species and Cordyceps in Bhutan: Implications for ecological functions and rural livelihoods," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).
    10. Vorlaufer, Miriam & Wollni, Meike & Ibañez, Marcela, 2014. "Equity vs. Conservation: Can Payments for Environmental Services (PES) achieve both?," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183070, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Daniel A. DeCaro & Marco A. Janssen & Allen Lee, 2015. "Synergistic effects of voting and enforcement on internalized motivation to cooperate in a resource dilemma," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(6), pages 511-537, November.
    12. Blanco, Esther & Struwe, Natalie & Walker, James M., 2021. "Experimental evidence on sharing rules and additionality in transfer payments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1221-1247.
    13. 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.
    14. Laura Abrardi, 2019. "Behavioral barriers and the energy efficiency gap: a survey of the literature," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 46(1), pages 25-43, March.
    15. Moros, Lina & Vélez, María Alejandro & Pfaff, Alexander & Quintero, Daniela, 2022. "Ending Ecoservices Payments Does Not Crow Out Lab-in-the Field Forest Conservation," EfD Discussion Paper 22-7, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    16. Deidre M. Peroff & Duarte B. Morais & Erin Sills, 2022. "The Role of Agritourism Microentrepreneurship and Collective Action in Shaping Stewardship of Farmlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, July.
    17. 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.
    18. Blanco, Esther & Haller, Tobias & Walker, James M., 2018. "Provision of environmental public goods: Unconditional and conditional donations from outsiders," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 815-831.
    19. Esther Blanco & Tobias Haller & James M. Walker, 2016. "Provision of public goods: Unconditional and conditional donations from outsiders," Working Papers 2016-16, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck, revised Nov 2016.
    20. Jens Rommel & Sergio Villamayor-Tomas & Malte Müller & Christine Werthmann, 2015. "Game Participation and Preservation of the Commons: An Experimental Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-15, July.

    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:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:3:p:27-:d:75874. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.