IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5598-d809750.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Affirmative Policy in Nepal’s Community Forestry: Does it Make a Difference in Terms of Social Sustainability?

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Murer

    (Independent Researcher, 31100 Treviso, Italy)

  • Alessandra Piccoli

    (Rural Studies Group, Faculty of Education, Free University of Bolzano, 39016 Bressanone, Italy)

Abstract

Decentralized forest management is criticized for not involving women in decision-making. The study explores what the introduction of affirmative policy in community forestry committees means for the participation of women in decision making in four cases in the middle hills of Nepal. The qualitative analysis of interviews and observations draws on feminist political ecology, a women’s participation typology, the critical mass theory and gender justice. The findings centre on the importance of electoral procedures, the role of authorities, the role of the familial context and whether and how women internalized and contested patriarchal norms. The women’s quota was found to have had as yet little impact on substantive participation, yet the enhanced exposure of female committee members to the discrepancy between the gender equality discourse introduced in community forestry and the persistent male domination seemed to create, in a few women performing as critical actors, an enhanced awareness of male suppression; an awareness that is a prerequisite for contestation of those patriarchal norms denying women access to power over forest and, generally speaking, of gender injustice. This research reports examples of women, brought in the executive committees by the studied affirmative policies, successfully contesting traditional gender roles and gender injustice, negotiating for them and for the other women, a more effective and meaningful participation in the management of Community Forests.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Murer & Alessandra Piccoli, 2022. "Affirmative Policy in Nepal’s Community Forestry: Does it Make a Difference in Terms of Social Sustainability?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5598-:d:809750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5598/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5598/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beath, Andrew & Christia, Fotini & Enikolopov, Ruben, 2013. "Empowering Women through Development Aid: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Afghanistan," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(3), pages 540-557, August.
    2. Shanta Paudel Khatiwada & Wei Deng & Bikash Paudel & Janak Raj Khatiwada & Jifei Zhang & Jiangjun Wan, 2018. "A Gender Analysis of Changing Livelihood Activities in the Rural Areas of Central Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.
    3. Alesina, Alberto & Dollar, David, 2000. "Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 33-63, March.
    4. Montserrat Sagot, 2010. "Does the Political Participation of Women Matter? Democratic Representation, Affirmative Action and Quotas in Costa Rica," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(5), pages 25-34, September.
    5. Marie-Christine Cormier-Salem, 2017. "Let the Women Harvest the Mangrove. Carbon Policy, and Environmental Injustice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
    6. Agarwal, Bina, 2001. "Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1623-1648, October.
    7. Apurva Rai & Vimal Chandra Pandey & Ashutosh Kumar Singh & Nandita Ghoshal & Nandita Singh, 2021. "Butea monosperma: a leguminous species for sustainable forestry programmes," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 8492-8505, June.
    8. Norris, Pippa & Lovenduski, Joni, 2001. "Blair's Babes: Critical Mass Theory, Gender, and Legislative Life," Working Paper Series rwp01-039, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Chesney McOmber & Katharine McNamara & Therese d’Auria Ryley & Sarah L. McKune, 2021. "Investigating the Conceptual Plurality of Empowerment through Community Concept Drawing: Case Studies from Senegal, Kenya, and Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-17, March.
    10. Shrestha, Gitta & Joshi, Deepa & Clement, Floriane, 2019. "Masculinities and hydropower in India: a feminist political ecology perspective," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 13(1):130-1.
    11. Angelsen, Arild & Jagger, Pamela & Babigumira, Ronnie & Belcher, Brian & Hogarth, Nicholas J. & Bauch, Simone & Börner, Jan & Smith-Hall, Carsten & Wunder, Sven, 2014. "Environmental Income and Rural Livelihoods: A Global-Comparative Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 12-28.
    12. Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Lund, Jens Friis & Nielsen, Øystein Juul, 2012. "The public finance potential of community forestry in Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 113-121.
    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. Damania, Richard & Joshi, Anupam & Russ, Jason, 2020. "India’s forests – Stepping stone or millstone for the poor?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    2. Espada, Ana Luiza Violato & Kainer, Karen A., 2023. "Women and timber management: From assigned cook to strategic decision-maker of community land use," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    3. Macqueen, Duncan & Bolin, Anna & Greijmans, Martin & Grouwels, Sophie & Humphries, Shoana, 2020. "Innovations towards prosperity emerging in locally controlled forest business models and prospects for scaling up," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    4. Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Johnsen, Fred Hakon & Konoshima, Masashi & Yoshimoto, Atsushi, 2013. "Community forestry in the hills of Nepal: Determinants of user participation in forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 6-13.
    5. Paudel, Ganesh & Bhusal, Prabin & Kimengsi, Jude Ndzifon, 2021. "Determining the costs and benefits of Scientific Forest Management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    6. Oldekop, Johan A. & Gabay, Monica & Humphreys, David & Kamoto, Judith F.M. & Mutta, Doris N. & Song, Conghe & Timko, Joleen & Rasmussen, Laura Vang & Stoian, Dietmar, 2021. "A framework for analysing contextual factors shaping forest-poverty dynamics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. Ida Nadia S. Djenontin & Samson Foli & Leo C. Zulu, 2018. "Revisiting the Factors Shaping Outcomes for Forest and Landscape Restoration in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Way Forward for Policy, Practice and Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-34, March.
    8. Baiyegunhi, L.J.S. & Oppong, B.B., 2016. "Commercialisation of mopane worm (Imbrasia belina) in rural households in Limpopo Province, South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 141-148.
    9. Michael E. Cummings & Alan Gamlen, 2019. "Diaspora engagement institutions and venture investment activity in developing countries," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(4), pages 289-313, December.
    10. Lauren Pandolfelli & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Stephan Dohrn, 2008. "Gender and collective action: motivations, effectiveness and impact," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 1-11.
    11. Shackleton, C.M. & Garekae, H. & Sardeshpande, M. & Sinasson Sanni, G. & Twine, W.C., 2024. "Non-timber forest products as poverty traps: Fact or fiction?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    12. Yannick Markhof & Isabela Franciscon & Nicolò Bird & Pedro Arruda, 2021. "Social assistance programmes in South Asia: an evaluation of socio-economic impacts," Research Report 62, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    13. Yasemin Bal Gunduz & Masyita Crystallin, 2014. "Do IMF-Supported Programs Catalyze Donor Assistance to Low-Income Countries?," IMF Working Papers 2014/202, International Monetary Fund.
    14. Goran Dostic & Zdravko Todorovic & Igor Todorovic, 2013. "International Aid And Principal-Agent Relationship: Evidence From Bosnia And Herzegovina," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 9(1), pages 115-126.
    15. Juliana Yael Milovich, 2018. "Does Aid Reduce Poverty?," OPHI Working Papers ophiwp122.pdf, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    16. Blessing Chiripanhura & Miguel Niño‐Zarazúa, 2015. "Aid, Political Business Cycles and Growth in Africa," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(8), pages 1387-1421, November.
    17. Broich, Tobias, 2017. "Do authoritarian regimes receive more Chinese development finance than democratic ones? Empirical evidence for Africa," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 180-207.
    18. Krishna Chaitanya Vadlamannati & Yuanxin Li & Samuel Brazys & Alexander Dukalskis, 2019. "Building Bridges or Breaking Bonds? The Belt and Road Initiative and Foreign Aid Competition," Working Papers 201906, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    19. Hur, Yoon Sun & Kim, Milim, 2020. "The Effectiveness of Development Aid to Fragile, conflict, and violence (FCV) Countries: Do Modality and Sector Matter?," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304216, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Balázs Szent-Iványi, 2015. "Are Democratising Countries Rewarded with Higher Levels of Foreign Aid?," Acta Oeconomica, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 65(4), pages 593-615, December.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5598-:d:809750. 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.