Differences in Forest Use Strategies for Cash Income between Households Living outside and inside Selectively Logged Production Forests in Myanmar

Abstract

In many tropical regions, rural households often depend on forests for cash income, but there is still little knowledge on how forest use strategies differ among people living in different locations. This study aimed to detect differences in forest use strategies and forest cash income dependency between households living outside and inside selectively logged production forests, known as Reserved Forests (RFs), in Bago Township, Myanmar. A questionnaire survey was conducted with 146 and 48 households living outside and inside the RFs, respectively. The inside-households (encroachers) had a much higher forest cash income dependency (83%), with charcoal production as the main forest use activity, than the outside-households (32%), with bamboo cutting as the main activity. Higher forest dependency was found for outside-households that had less farmland, better accessibility to forest and more recognition of prohibited access to RFs in forest law. This study revealed evidence of substantial forest use for commercial purposes in RFs by households living both inside and outside the RFs, despite local recognition of the illegality of the use. Implementing community forestry practices for local communities may be a better option to reduce illegal dependence on selectively logged production forests.

Condition of Illegally Logged Stands Following High Frequency Legal Logging in Bago Yoma, Myanmar

“…Thus, it may be an option to provide a legal right for local households to use bamboo resources sustainably, coupled with a strategy for restoring bamboo-dominated forests. In contrast, most of the encroachers in RFs were illegally engaged in charcoal making [27] and this present study has indicated that this illegal activity is a major factor of forest degradation. Because there is still an increasing demand for charcoal in rural areas in Myanmar [36], the establishment of a sustainable charcoal production system should be targeted through community forestry programs.…”

“…This is in contrast to Win et al [20] and Khai et al [17,21] who indicated that more illegal logging occurred for high-quality timber species such as teak and pyinkado. Our study plots were within compartments where people had settled illegally, and Saung et al [27] indicated that such encroachers mostly engaged in charcoal making to generate income (see the photos 3 and 6 in the Supplementary Material S1). Our GLM result on the preference for charcoal species for illegal logging is compatible with the survey results on charcoal making as a livelihood strategy [27].…”

“…Our study plots were within compartments where people had settled illegally, and Saung et al [27] indicated that such encroachers mostly engaged in charcoal making to generate income (see the photos 3 and 6 in the Supplementary Material S1). Our GLM result on the preference for charcoal species for illegal logging is compatible with the survey results on charcoal making as a livelihood strategy [27]. Moreover, we found charcoal kilns near the plots.…”

“…When we consider restoration strategies in degraded forests in RFs, forest resource use by local people for their income should be taken into account, although the Myanmar forest law prohibits local households from harvesting forest products from RFs for commercial use without permission. Saung et al [27] revealed that many households living adjacent to RFs engage in illegal bamboo cutting to generate income. Thus, it may be an option to provide a legal right for local households to use bamboo resources sustainably, coupled with a strategy for restoring bamboo-dominated forests.…”

Can commercialization of non-timber forest product (NTFP) reduce deforestation in Myanmar?

“…Almost 95 % of rural population is entirely dependent upon the forest products for basic needs while only 6 % of total cash income is contributed by the forest products in the north-west region of Myanmar (Hlaing et al 2017). Likely, the contribution of NTFPs to household income varies in different regions such as 25 % to 36 % of total household income derived from NTFPs in eastern and western Bago Yoma, 38 % in the central dry zone, 55 % in Chin State, and 53 % in the eastern mountain range which is called Shan Yoma; meaning that NTFPs also provide an alternative income source for landless people during the off-farm season and when there is a shortfall of agricultural products (Oo et al 2012, Aung et al 2015, Moe and Liu 2016, Htun et al 2017, Soe and Yeo-Chaung 2019, Saung et al 2020. At the national level, the share of national gross domestic products (GDP) from forestry sector was 0.6 % in the fiscal year of (2005 2006) which declines to 0.2 % in 2015 2016 and 0.08 % in 2019 (CSO 2020).…”