Does decentralization work? Forest conservation in the Himalayas
R. Prabhakar () and
Bhupendra Singh Mehta ()
Additional contact information
R. Prabhakar: Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment
Bhupendra Singh Mehta: Foundation for Ecological Security
Indian Statistical Institute, Planning Unit, New Delhi Discussion Papers from Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi, India
This paper studies the effect of decentralization of management and control on forest conservation in the central Himalayas. The density of forest cover (measured with satellite images and field surveys) in forests managed by village councils is compared with that in state-managed forests and in unmanaged village commons. Geographic proximity and historical and ecological information are used to identify the effects of the three types of management regimes. Village council management does no worse, and possibly better, at conservation than state management and costs an order of magnitude less per unit area. Relative to unmanaged commons, village council management raises crown cover in broadleaved forests (the type of forest that may provide the most benefits to villagers under the rules) but not in pine forests.
Pages: 42 pages
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Working Paper: Does decentralization work? Forest conservation in the Himalayas (2005)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ind:isipdp:05-04
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Indian Statistical Institute, Planning Unit, New Delhi Discussion Papers from Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi, India Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Shamprasad M. Pujar ().