The Implications of Community Forest Income on Social and Environmental Sustainability

Eve Bohnett (), Sanju Lamichhane, Yanjing Tracy Liu, Scott Yabiku, Digambar Singh Dahal, Siraj Mammo, Kossi Fandjinou, Bilal Ahmad and Li An
Additional contact information
Eve Bohnett: Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, USA
Sanju Lamichhane: Center for Complex Human-Environment Systems, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, USA
Yanjing Tracy Liu: Center for Complex Human-Environment Systems, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, USA
Scott Yabiku: Department of Sociology and Criminology, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16802, USA
Digambar Singh Dahal: Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbAII) Project, Climate Change Management Division, Ministry of Forest and Environment, Kathmandu 44600, Nepal
Siraj Mammo: Department of Forestry, University of Ambo, Ambo P.O. Box 19, Ethiopia
Kossi Fandjinou: Department of Plant Sciences, University of Lome, Lome 01BP1515, Togo
Bilal Ahmad: Institute of Agriculture, Sciences and Forestry, University of Swat, Charbagh 19120, Pakistan
Li An: Center for Complex Human-Environment Systems, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, USA

Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, issue 8, 1-23

Abstract: Community forestry is a strategy in which communities are, to some degree, responsible for managing the forests, using a more participatory approach to replace the traditional top-down model. Various forms of policies and governance have been developed to balance goals to ensure the community’s socioeconomic resilience and the landscape’s biological sustainability. The reinvestment of community forest (CF) income back into forest regeneration is not well documented, and there is a lack of research comparing forest income to the costs associated with forest regeneration. This research examines how changes in timber income and forest-regeneration costs affected CF social and ecological viability. We conducted expert elicitation interviews for CFs ( n = 33) under three zones of management in Chitwan, Nepal (Zone 1: buffer zone, Zone 2: forest corridor, and Zone 3: community forest). To examine how CFs differ financially, we asked questions regarding timber income and forest-regeneration expenditures and then posed 22 questions regarding socioeconomic and biological aspects of the CF. Finally, a Kruskal–Wallis rank-sum test was performed to determine whether there were statistically significant differences in perceptions between groups, including zone, timber income (high, medium, low), and forest-regeneration expenditures (high, medium, low). The amount of income from timber had a substantial impact on the communities’ biological benefits and financial stability. Lower timber-income areas were thought to be less economically stable, lack the resources to enforce rules and regulations necessary to meet the CF’s socioeconomic or biological goals, and place more significant restrictions on the amount of wood members can harvest from the forest. Communities that spent less money on forest regeneration reported poorer levels of forest regeneration, economic sustainability, and community rights. Our research shows that community-forest user groups in the Chitwan district have a significant income and expenditure gap between their forests’ biological and socioeconomic advantages and resilience.

Keywords: community forest; timber income; forest-regeneration expenditures (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6603/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6603/ (text/html)

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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6603-:d:1122764

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().