IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v53y2012i1p73-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Socioeconomic Impacts of Public Forest Policies on Heterogeneous Agricultural Households

Author

Listed:
  • Bhubaneswor Dhakal
  • Hugh Bigsby
  • Ross Cullen

Abstract

Nepal has a long history of returning public forests to local people as part of its community forestry programme. In principle the community forestry programme is designed to address both environmental quality and poverty alleviation. However, concern has been expressed that forest policies emphasise environmental conservation, and that this has a detrimental impact on the use of community forests in rural Nepal where households require access to public forest products to sustain livelihoods. To study the effect of government policies on forest use, an economic model of a typical small community of economically heterogeneous households in Nepal was developed. The model incorporates a link between private agriculture and public forest resources, and uses this link to assess the socioeconomic impacts of forest policies on the use of public forests. Socioeconomic impacts were measured in terms of household income, employment and income inequality. The results show that some forest policies have a negative economic impact, and the impacts are more serious than those reported by other studies. This study shows that existing forest policies reduce household income and employment, and widen income inequalities within communities, compared to alternative policies. Certain forest policies even constrain the poorest households’ ability to meet survival needs. The findings indicate that the socioeconomic impacts of public forest policies may be underestimated in developing countries unless household economic heterogeneity and forestry’s contribution to production are accounted for. The study also demonstrates that alternative policies for managing common property resources would reduce income inequalities in rural Nepalese communities and lift incomes and employment to a level where even the poorest households could meet their basic needs. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Bhubaneswor Dhakal & Hugh Bigsby & Ross Cullen, 2012. "Socioeconomic Impacts of Public Forest Policies on Heterogeneous Agricultural Households," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(1), pages 73-95, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:53:y:2012:i:1:p:73-95
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-012-9548-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10640-012-9548-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-012-9548-4?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. Varughese, George & Ostrom, Elinor, 2001. "The Contested Role of Heterogeneity in Collective Action: Some Evidence from Community Forestry in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 747-765, May.
    2. Adhikari, Bhim & Williams, Frances & Lovett, Jon C., 2007. "Local benefits from community forests in the middle hills of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 464-478, January.
    3. Alig, Ralph J. & Adams, Darius M. & McCarl, Bruce A., 1998. "Impacts of Incorporating Land Exchanges Between Forestry and Agriculture in Sector Models," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 389-401, December.
    4. Anthon, Signe & Lund, Jens Friis & Helles, Finn, 2008. "Targeting the poor: Taxation of marketed forest products in developing countries," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 197-224, June.
    5. S. Mansoob Murshed & Scott Gates, 2005. "Spatial–Horizontal Inequality and the Maoist Insurgency in Nepal," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 121-134, February.
    6. Karky, Bhaskar Singh & Skutsch, Margaret, 2010. "The cost of carbon abatement through community forest management in Nepal Himalaya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 666-672, January.
    7. Adhikari, Bhim & Di Falco, Salvatore & Lovett, Jon C., 2004. "Household characteristics and forest dependency: evidence from common property forest management in Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 245-257, February.
    8. Maskey, Vishakha & Gebremedhin, Tesfa G. & Dalton, Timothy J., 2006. "Social and cultural determinants of collective management of community forest in Nepal," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 261-274, January.
    9. Hjortsø, Carsten Nico & Stræde, Steffen & Helles, Finn, 2006. "Applying multi-criteria decision-making to protected areas and buffer zone management: A case study in the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 91-108, June.
    10. F B Abdelaziz & J M Martel & A Mselmi, 2004. "IMGD: an interactive method for multiobjective group decision aid," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(5), pages 464-474, May.
    11. Stenberg, Luz Centeno & Siriwardana, Mahinda, 2007. "Forest conservation in the Philippines: An economic assessment of selected policy responses using a computable general equilibrium model," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(6), pages 671-693, February.
    12. Bardhan, Pranab & Udry, Christopher, 1999. "Development Microeconomics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198773719.
    13. Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 1999. "The Ambiguous Impact of Inequality on Local Resource Management," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 773-788, May.
    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. Vallino, Elena & Aldahsev,Gani, 2013. "NGOs and participatory conservation in developing countries: why are there inefficiencies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201318, University of Turin.
    2. Aldashev, Gani & Vallino, Elena, 2019. "The dilemma of NGOs and participatory conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Djanibekov, Utkur & Villamor, Grace, 2015. "Spillover effects of market-based instruments under revenue uncertainty in Jambi Province, Indonesia," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211578, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Bhubaneswor Dhakal & Narendra Chand & Him Lal Shrestha & Anita Shrestha & Nischal Dhakal & Bikash Adhikari & Shyam Krishna Shrestha & Krishna Bahadur Karki & Padam Bhandari, 2022. "Paradoxes of Aggravated Vulnerability, Marginalization, and Peril of Forest-Based Communities after Increasing Conservative Forest and Protected Areas in Nepal: A Policy Lesson on Land-Based Climate C," World, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-31, August.

    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. Pandit, Ram & Bevilacqua, Eddie, 2011. "Forest users and environmental impacts of community forestry in the hills of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 345-352, June.
    2. Paudel, Jayash, 2018. "Community-Managed Forests, Household Fuelwood Use and Food Consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 62-73.
    3. Paudel, Jayash, 2016. "Community-Managed Forests and Household Welfare: Empirical Evidence from Nepal," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235481, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2009. "Heterogeneity and Collective Management: Evidence from Common Forests in Himachal Pradesh, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 676-686, March.
    5. Sapkota, Prativa & Keenan, Rodney J. & Ojha, Hemant R., 2018. "Community institutions, social marginalization and the adaptive capacity: A case study of a community forestry user group in the Nepal Himalayas," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 55-64.
    6. Pandey, Shiva Shankar & Maraseni, Tek Narayan & Reardon-Smith, Kathryn & Cockfield, Geoff, 2017. "Analysing foregone costs of communities and carbon benefits in small scale community based forestry practice in Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 160-166.
    7. 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.
    8. Sullivan, Abigail & York, Abigail M. & An, Li & Yabiku, Scott T. & Hall, Sharon J., 2017. "How does perception at multiple levels influence collective action in the commons? The case of Mikania micrantha in Chitwan, Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Thapliyal, Sneha & Mukherji, Arnab & Malghan, Deepak, 2019. "Economic inequality and loss of commons: Evidence from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 693-712.
    10. Iversen, Vegard & Chhetry, Birka & Francis, Paul & Gurung, Madhu & Kafle, Ghanendra & Pain, Adam & Seeley, Janet, 2006. "High value forests, hidden economies and elite capture: Evidence from forest user groups in Nepal's Terai," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 93-107, June.
    11. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Medhin, Haileselassie, 2020. "Leader turnover and forest management outcomes: Micro-level evidence from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Schultz, Bill, 2020. "Resource management and joint-planning in fragmented societies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    13. repec:nam:befdwp:5 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Bhagirath Behera & Pulak Mishra, 2018. "Democratic Local Institutions for Sustainable Management and Use of Minor Irrigation Systems: Experience of Pani Panchayats in Odisha, India," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(03), pages 1-27, July.
    15. Poteete, Amy R. & Ostrom, Elinor, 2004. "In pursuit of comparable concepts and data about collective action," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 215-232, December.
    16. Rayamajhi, Santosh & Smith-Hall, Carsten & Helles, Finn, 2012. "Empirical evidence of the economic importance of Central Himalayan forests to rural households," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 25-35.
    17. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2011. "Gendered effects of work and participation in collective forest management," MPRA Paper 31091, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Fijnanda van Klingeren & Nan Dirk de Graaf, 2021. "Heterogeneity, trust and common-pool resource management," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(1), pages 37-64, March.
    19. Hussein Luswaga & Ernst-August Nuppenau, 2020. "Participatory Forest Management in West Usambara Tanzania: What Is the Community Perception on Success?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    20. Okumu, Boscow & Muchapondwa, Edwin, 2020. "Determinants of successful collective management of forest resources: Evidence from Kenyan Community Forest Associations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    21. Omkar Joshi & Rajan Parajuli & Gehendra Kharel & Neelam C Poudyal & Eric Taylor, 2018. "Stakeholder opinions on scientific forest management policy implementation in Nepal," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, September.

    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:kap:enreec:v:53:y:2012:i:1:p:73-95. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.