The relative distribution: An alternative approach to evaluate the impact of community level forestry organisations on households

Land Use Policy

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 443-449

  Yadav, Bhagwan Dutta ^a   Bigsby, Hugh ^a   MacDonald, Ian ^a  

^a LINCOLN UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Community forestry; Community resource governance; Elite theory; Poverty alleviation; Relative distribution

Indexed keywords

COMMUNITY FORESTRY; COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; DECISION MAKING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; POVERTY ALLEVIATION;

NEPAL;

EID: 84907493935     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.08.019     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Adhikari B., Di-Falco S. Social inequality, local leadership and collective action: an empirical study of forest commons. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2009, 21:179-194. 10.1057/ejdr.2008.16.
2. Adhikari B., Di-Falco I.S., Lovett J. Household characteristics and forest dependency evidence from common property forest management in Nepal. Ecol. Econ. 2004, 48(2):245-257.
3. Agrawal A. Common property intuitions and sustainable Governance of Resources. World Dev. 2001, 129(10):1649-1672.
4. Agrawal A. Environ mentality community, intimate government, and the making of environmental subjects in Kumaon, India. The Winner-Green Foundation for Anthropological Research. Anthropology 2005, 46(2):205-211.
5. Agresti A. Categorical Data Analysis 1990, John Wiley, New York.
6. Agresti A., Finlay B. Statistical Methods for the Social Science 2009, Macmillan Inc., USA. 4th ed.
7. Andersson K.P., Ostrom E. Analysing decentralized resource regimes from a polycentric perspective. Policy Sci. 2008, 41(1):71-93. 10.1007/s11077-007-9055-6.
8. Bajracharya B. Institutional Factors that Influences on the Access of Poor to Forest Benefits: Case study of Community and Leasehold Forestry in Nepal 2008, (a published PhD thesis), Massy University, Palmerstone North, New Zealand, Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10179/715.
9. Banjade M.R., Timilsina N.P., Neupane H.R., Bhandari K., Bhattarai T., Rana S.K. Transforming agency and structure for facilitation pro-poor governance in community forestry. J. For. Livelihood 2006, 5(1):22-33.
10. Bistha D.B. Fatalism and Development: Nepal's Struggle for Modernisation 1991, Orient Longman, Calcutta, India.
11. Branney P., Malla Y.B., BhaTerai B., Tamrakar P.R., Neupane H.R. Innovative Forestry: A Synthesis of Small-Scale Forest Management Practice from Nepal: A Field Worker's Guidebook for Supporting Community Forest Management 2001, Department of International and Rural Development, University of Reading, United Kingdom Livelihoods and Forestry Programme (HMGN/DFID), Kathmandu, Nepal.
12. Campbell B., Shackleton S. The organizational structures for community based natural resource management in Southern Africa. Afr. Stud. Q. 2005, 5(3). http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v5/v5i3a6.htm (online).
13. Cock A.R. External actors and the relative autonomy of the ruling elite in post-UNTAC Cambodia. J. Southeast Asian Stud. 2010, 41(02):241-265. 10.1017/S0022463410000044.
14. Dahal S., Nepal S.K., Schuett M.A. Examining marginalized communities and local conservation institutions: the case of Nepal's Annapurna Conservation Area. Environ. Manage. 2014, 53(1):219-230. 10.1007/s00267-013-0204-8.
15. Dahl R.A. A critique of the ruling elite model. Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 1958, 52(2):463-469.
16. Dev O.P., Yadav N.P., Baginski O.S., Soussan J. Impact of community forestry on livelihood in middle hill of Nepal. J. For. Livelihoods 2003, 3(1):64-77.
17. Dhakal B., Bhatta B. An institutional model to explain utilisation problem of community forest products. Int. J. Soc. For. 2010, 2(2):23-48.
18. Dirks N.B. Caste of Minds: Colonization and the Making of Modern India 2001, Princeton University Press, NJ, USA.
19. Domhoff G.W. Social clubs, policy-planning groups, and corporations: a network study of ruling-class cohesiveness. Insurgent Sociol. 1975, 5(1):173-184.
20. A Tale of Two Farming Families in Nepal. Both have the Will to Climb out of Poverty but only one has the Way - Through a Forestry Project to Restore Degraded Land 2002, FAO, United Nation, Retrieved on 30 of June 2006 from http://www.fao.org/news/2002/020101-e.htm.
21. Farazmand A. The elite question toward a Normative Elite Theory of Organization. Admin. Soc. 1999, 31(3):321-360.
22. Gautam A. Equity and livelihoods in Nepal's community forestry. Int. J. Soc. For. 2009, 2(2):101-122.
23. Hansen P.L. Second Generation Community Forestry: A Study of the Pro-poor Focus in Community Forestry in Nepal 2007, (Master thesis), International Development Studies, Institute for Society & Globalisation Roskilde University.
24. Hazán M. The structure of Mexican elites: an enduring puzzle. Int. Rev. Sociol. 2001, 11(2):217-229. 10.1080/713674039.
25. Henderson E.A. Civilizations in world politics: plural and pluralist perspectives. Int. Relat. 2010, 8(2):710-712. 10.1017/S1537592710001039.
26. Higley J. Elite theory and elite. Handbook of Politics 2010, New York, Springer.
27. Higley J. Review essay: the ruling class' revisited. Contemp. Sociol. 1984, 13(1):143-146.
28. Higley J., Moore G. Elite integration in the United States and Australia. Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 1981, 75(3):581-597.
29. Iversen V., Chettry B., Francis P., Gurung M., Kafle G., Pain A., Seeley J. High value forests, hidden economies and elite capture: evidence from forest user groups in Nepal's Terai. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 58(1):93-107.
30. Jones S. Tigers, trees and Tharu: An analysis of community forestry in the buffer zone of the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Geoforum 2007, 38(3):558-575.
31. Kanel K.R., Poudyal R.P., Baral J.P. Nepal community forestry 2005 2005, Retrieved from http://www.recoftc.org/site/fileadmin/docs/publications.
32. Kanel K.R., Dahal G.R. Community forestry policy and its economic implications: an experience From Nepal. Int. J. Soc. For. 2008, 1(1):50-60.
33. Lachapelle P.R., Smith P.D., McCool S.F. Access to power or genuine empowerment? An analysis of three community forest groups in Nepal. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 2004, 11(1):1-12.
34. Larson A., Ribot J. The poverty of forestry policy: double standards on an uneven playing field. Sustain. Sci. 2007, 2(2):189-204. 10.1007/s11625-007-0030-0.
35. Lawrence A., Paudel K., Barnes R., Malla Y. Adaptive value of participatory biodiversity monitoring in community forestry. Environ. Conserv. 2007, 33(4):325-334.
36. Lebel L., Daniel R., Badenoch1 N., Garden P., Imamura1 M. A multi-level perspective on conserving with communities: experiences from upper tributary watersheds in Montana mainland Southeast Asia. Int. J. Commons 2008, 2(1):127-154.
37. Leberta T., Rohde R. Land reform and the new elite: exclusion of the poor from communal land in Namaqualand, South Africa. J. Arid Environ. 2007, 70(4):818-833.
38. Lund J.F., Baral K., Bhandari N.S., Chhetri B.B.K., Larsen H.O., Nielsen O.J., Puri L., Rutt L.R., Treue T. Who benefits from taxation of forest products in Nepal's community forests?. For. Policy Econ. 2014, 38(1):119-125. 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.010.
39. Maddox B., Esposito L. Literacy inequalities, mediation and the public good: a case study of physical proximity and social distance in Nepal. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 2013, 34(2):243-261. 10.1080/01425692.2012.704722.
40. Mahanty H., Guernier J., Yasmi Y. A fair share? Sharing the benefits and costs of collaborative forest management. Int. For. Rev. 2009, 11(2):268-280.
41. Maharjan M.R., Dhakal T.R., Thapa S., Schreckenberg K.K., Luttrell C. Improving the benefits to the poor from community forestry in the Churia Region of Nepal. Int. For. Rev. 2009, 11(2):254-267. 10.1505/ifor.11.2.254.
42. Malla Y.B., Neupane H.R., Branny P.J. Why are not poor people benefiting more from community forestry?. J. For. Livelihoods 2005, 3(1):78-91.
43. Malla Y.B. Impact of community forestry policy on rural livelihoods and food security in Nepal. Unasylva 2000, 202(51):37-45.
44. Mansuri G., Rao V. Community-based and driven development: a critical review. World Bank Res. Observer 2004, 19(1):1-39.
45. Maskey V., Gebremedhin T.G., Dalton T.J. Social and cultural determinants of collective management of community forest in Nepal. J. For. Econ. 2006, 26(2):110-118.
46. McFadden D. The measurement of urban travel demand. J. Public Econ. 1974, 3(4):303-328.
47. McFadden D. Econometric models of probabilistic choice. Int. J. High Perform. Comput. Appl. 1981, 7(3):231-253. 10.1177/109434209300700305.
48. Mills W. The Power Elite 1956, Oxford University Press, New York.
49. MPFS Master Plan for the Forestry Sector 1989, His Majesty Government of Nepal.
50. Nagendra H., Pareeth S., Sharma B., Schweik C., Adhikari K. Forest fragmentation and regrowth in an institutional mosaic of community, government and private ownership in Nepal. Landsc. Ecol. 2008, 23(1):41-54. 10.1007/s10980-007-9162-y.
51. North D.C. Institutions. J. Econ. Perspect. 1991, 5(1):97-112.
52. Ostrom E. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action 1991, Cambridge University Press, New York.
53. Pareto V. Corso di Economia Politica 1896, Torino, Boringhieri.
54. Pollini J. Carbon sequestration for linking conservation and rural development in madagascar: the case of the Vohidrazana-Mantadia Corridor Restoration and Conservation Carbon Project. J. Sustain. For. 2009, 28(3&5):322-342. 10.1080/10549810902791507.
55. Putnam R.D. Studying elite political culture the case of ideology. APSR 1971, 65(3):651-681.
56. Rao K.S., Semwal R.L., Maikhuri R.K., Nautiyal S., Sen K.K., Singh K., Chandrasekhar K., Saxena K.G. Indigenous ecological knowledge, biodiversity and sustainable development in the central Himalayas. Trop. Ecol. 2003, 44(1):93-111.
57. Sollis P. Multilateral agencies, NGOs, and policy reform. Dev. Pract. 1992, 2(3):163-178.
58. Scott W.R. Institutions and Organizations: Foundation for Organizational Science 2001, Sage Publication.
59. Shrestha K.K. Rethinking participatory forestry for equity: Views from Nepal. The paper presented in XIII World Forestry Congress Buenos Aires, Argentina, 18-23 October 2009 2009, Argentina, Buenos Aires.
60. Thoms C.A. Community control of resources and the challenge of improving local livelihoods: a critical examination of community forestry in Nepal. Geoforum 2008, 39(8):1452-1465.
61. Youn E. Archival traditions in Korean history: from medieval practice to the contemporary Public Records Management Act. Arch. Sci. 2013, 13(1):23-44.