Environmental justice and ecosystem services: A disaggregated analysis of community access to forest benefits in Nepal

Chaudhary, Sunita; McGregor, Andrew; Houston, Donna; Chettri, Nakul

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.020

Cited by 76 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, we found that ES benefits were predominantly received by certain stakeholders, e.g., local stakeholders and businesses. Other studies observed similar patterns in Indonesia and Nepal, for example (Suwarno et al 2016, Chaudhary et al 2018. Second, we also found that public organizations and NGOs were most involved in ES management, mainly indirectly, as also observed elsewhere (Alonso Roldán et al 2015, Felipe-Lucia et al 2015, Turkelboom et al 2018.…”

Section: Distribution Of Stakeholders' Roles In Relation To the Ecosysupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Ecosystem services (ESs), defined as the benefits that humans derive from ecosystems, contribute to the well-being of people in multiple ways. As ES benefits are heterogeneously distributed in society, with some stakeholders being able to influence how ESs are delivered to humans, ES governance is profoundly linked to issues of power and equity (Ernstson 2013, Berbés-Blázquez et al 2016, Chaudhary et al 2018. Stakeholders play different roles in the distribution of ESs or natural resources, as well as their management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Frameworks focusing on indirect contributions to ES decision making Iniesta-Arandia et al 2004, Adger et al 2005, Armitage et al 2009. Research gaps include the development of methods to better understand the different stakeholder roles and inequities in relation to ESs, as well as the mechanisms that underpin them (Sikor 2013, Barnaud et al 2018, Chaudhary et al 2018.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services

Vallet¹,

Locatelli²,

Levrel³

et al. 2019

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The issues of power and equity are gaining attention in research on ecosystem services (ESs). Stakeholders benefiting from ESs are not necessarily able or authorized to participate in ES management. Thus, we have proposed an analytical framework to identify and qualify stakeholders' roles in relation to ES flows. Building on existing frameworks in the ES literature, we aimed to unravel the different direct and indirect management contributions to ES flows and link them to ES benefits. Direct management targets the functioning of ecosystems, the flows of services, and the benefits received by society, whereas indirect management facilitates, controls, or restricts the activities of direct managers. We applied this framework to the Mariño watershed (Peru) to describe stakeholders' roles using a set of 8 ESs. We have discussed the implications of our findings in terms of equity and power distribution. We conducted faceto-face semistructured interviews with representatives of 52 watershed stakeholders to understand how they managed and benefited from ESs. We used statistical analysis (permutation tests) to detect significant differences in the number of received and managed ESs among stakeholder sectors, i.e., civil society, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), business, and the public sector, and scales, from local to national levels. Indirect forms of ES management were more frequent than direct ones for all ESs. Water quantity, water quality, and agricultural production were managed by the largest number of stakeholder types. The differences in the number of stakeholder types benefiting from and managing ESs could result from intentional choices, e.g., preferences for local benefits. We also found clear differences in the identity of stakeholders who managed or benefited from ESs. Local stakeholders and the business sector benefited from a higher number of ESs, and public organizations and NGOs were most involved in ES management. More equitable governance of ESs should aim to integrate more diverse stakeholders into decision making. Further empirical research could use our framework to explore the factors determining stakeholders' roles and power distribution. There is a particular need to understand how rights, endowments, and entitlements, as well as spatial configuration, underpin inequities in different social and cultural contexts.

show abstract

Section: Distribution Of Stakeholders' Roles In Relation To the Ecosysupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services

Vallet¹,

Locatelli²,

Levrel³

et al. 2019

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, even within the same community, vulnerability and adaptive capacity differ from individual to individual and from group to group [91]. Poor and marginalized sections of the communities should be better included in decision making and benefit-sharing mechanisms to increase their adaptive capacity, while directing more benefits toward privileged groups needs to be avoided [92,93].…”

Section: Community-level Adaptation Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptation to Climate Change in Panchase Mountain Ecological Regions of Nepal

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rural mountain communities in developing countries are considered particularly vulnerable to environmental change, including climate change. Forests and agriculture provide numerous ecosystem goods and services (EGS) to local communities and can help people adapt to the impacts of climate change. There is however poor documentation on the role of EGS in people's livelihood and adaptation practices. This study in the rural Panchase Mountain Ecological Region of Nepal identifies practices being used to adapt to a changing environment through key informant interviews and focus group discussions. At the household level, livelihood diversification, changes in cropping patterns and farming practices, use of multipurpose plant species and income-generation activities were identified as adaptation strategies. Among major strategies at the community level were community forestry-based climate adaptation plans of action for forest and water resource management. Landscape-level adaptation strategies were large-scale collaborative projects and programs, such as Ecosystem-based Adaptation and Chitwan Annapurna Landscape conservation; which had implications at both the local and landscape-level. A proper blending and integration of adaptation strategies from individual households through to the community and to the landscape level is needed for implementing effective adaptation in the region.

show abstract

“…For example, Sunam and McCarthy's (2010) work on community-forest-user groups in Nepal shows that procedures for electing committee members favour better off, male, upper caste residents, and the interests of powerful elites rather than marginalised forestdependent groups. Still in Nepal, Chaudhary et al (2018) demonstrate that such exclusions in participation and representation result in an inequitable distribution of benefits from the forest.…”

Section: Inequalities Within Countries and Forests -Targets 101-104mentioning

confidence: 93%

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities – An Environmental Justice Perspective on Implications for Forests and People

Basnett¹,

Myers²,

Elias³

et al. 2019

Sustainable Development Goals: Their Impacts on Forests and People

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Environmental justice and ecosystem services: A disaggregated analysis of community access to forest benefits in Nepal

Cited by 76 publications

References 30 publications

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services

Adaptation to Climate Change in Panchase Mountain Ecological Regions of Nepal

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities – An Environmental Justice Perspective on Implications for Forests and People

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Environmental justice and ecosystem services: A disaggregated analysis of community access to forest benefits in Nepal

Cited by 76 publications

References 30 publications

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders&#8217; roles in relation to ecosystem services

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders&#8217; roles in relation to ecosystem services

Adaptation to Climate Change in Panchase Mountain Ecological Regions of Nepal

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities – An Environmental Justice Perspective on Implications for Forests and People

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services

Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services