Analysing foregone costs of communities and carbon benefits in small scale community based forestry practice in Nepal

Shiva Shankar Pandey, Tek Narayan Maraseni, Kathryn Reardon-Smith and Geoff Cockfield

Land Use Policy, 2017, vol. 69, issue C, 160-166

Abstract: Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, conservation and sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon (REDD+) are considered to be important cost effective approaches for global climate change mitigation; therefore, such practices are evolving as the REDD+ payment mechanism in developing countries. Using six years (2006–2012) data, this paper analyses trade-offs between carbon stock gains and the costs incurred by communities in generating additional carbon in 105 REDD+ pilot community forests in Nepal. It estimates foregone benefits for communities engaged in increasing carbon stocks in various dominant vegetation types. At recent carbon and commodity prices, communities receive on average US$ 0.47/ha/year of carbon benefits with the additional cost of US$ 67.30/ha/year. One dollar’s worth of community cost resulted 0.23Mg of carbon sequestration. Therefore, carbon payment alone may not be an attractive incentive within small-scale community forestry and should link with payments for ecosystem services. Moreover, the study found highest community sacrificed benefits in Shorea mixed broadleaf forests and lowest in Schima-Castanopsis forests, while carbon benefits were highest in Pine forests followed by Schima-Castanopsis forests and lowest in Rhododendron-Quercus forests. This indicates that costs and benefits may vary by vegetation type. A policy should consider payment for other environmental services, carbon gains, co-benefits and trade off while designing the REDD+ mechanism in community based forest land use practice with equitable community outcomes. The learning from this study will help in the formulation of an appropriate REDD+ policy for community forestry.

Keywords: Climate change; Community benefits; Carbon benefits; Community based forest; Forest land use; Tree species; REDD+ (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717303022
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:69:y:2017:i:c:p:160-166

DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.007

Access Statistics for this article

Land Use Policy is currently edited by Jaap Zevenbergen

More articles in Land Use Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Joice Jiang ().