The use and usefulness of inventory-based management planning to forest management: Evidence from community forestry in Nepal

Toft, Maja Nastasia Juul; Adeyeye, Yemi; Lund, Jens Friis

doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2015.06.007

Cited by 31 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It appears that harvesting operations are one of the basic components of forest management, where the FMP works as a tool to enforce what forest bureaucrats are supposed to classify as correct. Similar findings were presented by Rutt et al and Toft et al [15,16]…”

Section: Tree Harvesting Practices-are They In Compliance With Fmps?supporting

confidence: 90%

“…This apparently raises concern whether the FMP can support harvesting practices of CFUGs. This resonates with the findings of Toft et al [16], who observe that inventory results are seldom used in preparing FMPs and implementing management activities. A study by Bhattacharya and Basnyat [39], in the western Terai of Nepal, concludes that the prescribed allowable harvesting operations in the FMPs are complex and not specified in detail, which makes it difficult for the users to follow them.…”

Section: Tree Harvesting Practices-are They In Compliance With Fmps?supporting

confidence: 89%

“…Similarly, the rationale of the block divisions is questionable since users simply collect the AAH volume from the entire forest irrespective of the blocks. Similar findings were reflected in the study of Toft et al [16], who states that block division is done merely for administrative purposes.…”

Section: Tree Harvesting Practices-are They In Compliance With Fmps?supporting

confidence: 85%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What Governs Tree Harvesting in Community Forestry—Regulatory Instruments or Forest Bureaucrats’ Discretion?

Baral

Vacik

2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community forestry is required to follow a forest management plan (FMP) to ensure sustainable tree harvesting. However, the role of FMPs or forest bureaucrats' discretion in guiding harvesting decisions and the resultant effects has not been explored. This paper investigates tree harvesting practices in community forests (CF) and its effects on forest sustainability, using the forest inventory panel dataset for three consecutive periods (2010, 2013 and 2016), together with qualitative information obtained by key informant interviews and a review of records of the community forest users' group. Harvesting decisions in the CF are largely guided by the decrees or schematic instructions of forest bureaucrats, where the role of the FMP remains highly contested. Whether harvesting decisions should be guided by the prescriptions of the FMP or should be regulated through decrees is a matter of discourse. Forest bureaucrats are arbitrarily reducing harvesting quantities and rarely referring to the prescriptions of the FMP. Consequently, users are compelled to harvest less than half the quantity of trees prescribed in the FMP. Furthermore, they are only allowed to harvest poor quality and dead trees. As a result, the number of good quality trees has increased, while the number of seedlings and saplings has decreased significantly. Although harvesting of saplings and seedlings is a common practice, it is against the provisions of the FMP. Though the current bureaucratic discretion has shown quick short-term effects on the forest stand conditions, the long-term impacts should not be undermined. Our findings will be useful to implementors and policy makers in Nepal and other developing countries with similar circumstances for deciding the tree harvesting. We argue for a rational approach in designing harvesting prescriptions and complying with them rather than regulating harvesting practices through guidelines, circulars and bureaucratic discretion.

show abstract

Section: Tree Harvesting Practices-are They In Compliance With Fmps?supporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Tree Harvesting Practices-are They In Compliance With Fmps?supporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Tree Harvesting Practices-are They In Compliance With Fmps?supporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Governs Tree Harvesting in Community Forestry—Regulatory Instruments or Forest Bureaucrats’ Discretion?

Baral

Vacik

2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be seen, for instance, in formulating, submitting and monitoring management plans. This concern has also been highlighted in other research which also found that often the communities were not following management plans [30,31], though they were still effective in their forest management in terms of the bio-physical forest conditions [30]. The feeling from Toft et al [30] was that the requirements for the management plans need to reflect the purposes of the forest management as well as the capacity to complete, adhere to and monitor the plans.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…One may assume that each "failure" has required a regulatory response in the form of more regulations (e.g., more targeted and restrictive). Instead, a more outcome-oriented approach would be preferred in order to encourage sustainable and affordable or profitable practices (e.g., [30,33]). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Uneven Playing Field: Regulatory Barriers to Communities Making a Living from the Timber from Their Forests–Examples from Cambodia, Nepal and Vietnam

Gritten¹,

Greijmans²,

Lewis³

et al. 2015

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community forestry (CF) is widely viewed as the solution to many of the challenges facing forest management and governance in the Asia-Pacific region. However, it is often felt that CF is not delivering on its potential. This paper focuses on one possible limitation: the role of regulations in curbing communities' ability to make a living from their timber resources. The work covers Cambodia, Nepal and Vietnam, using policy analyses, national level experts' workshops, and focus group discussions in two CF sites in each country. The results highlight the fact that there are numerous, often prohibitive, regulations in place. One challenge is the regulations' complexity, often requiring a level of capacity far beyond the ability of community members and local government staff. The paper puts forward various recommendations including simplifying regulations and making them more outcome-based, and facilitating key stakeholders, including government and community based organizations, working together on the design and piloting of forest OPEN ACCESSForests 2015, 6 3434 monitoring based on mutually agreed forest management outcomes. The recommendations reflect the belief that for CF to succeed, communities must be allowed to make a meaningful living from their forests, a result of which would be increased investment in sustainable forest management.

show abstract

Rapid Silviculture Appraisal to Characterise Stand and Determine Silviculture Priorities of Community Forests in Nepal

Cedamon

Nuberg

Paudel³

et al. 2016

Small-scale Forestry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community forestry in Nepal is an example of a successful participatory forest management program. Developments in community forestry in four decades have focused on the social and governance aspects with little focus on the technical management of forests. This paper presents a silviculture description of community forests and provides silviculture recommendations using a rapid silviculture appraisal (RSA) approach. The RSA, which is a participatory technique involving local communities in assessing forests and silviculture options, is a simple and cost-effective process to gather information and engage forest users in the preparation of operational plans that are relevant to their needs. The RSA conducted on selected community forests in Nepal's Mid-hills region shows that forests are largely comprised of dominant crowns of one or two species. The majority of studied community forests have tree densities below 500 stems per hectare as a consequence of traditional forest management practices but the quality and quantity of the trees for producing forest products are low. Silviculture options preferred by forest users generally are those which are legally acceptable, doable with existing capacities of forest users and generate multiple forest products. For sustainable production of multiple forest products, the traditional forest management practices have to be integrated with silviculture-based forest management system.

show abstract

The use and usefulness of inventory-based management planning to forest management: Evidence from community forestry in Nepal

Cited by 31 publications

References 16 publications

What Governs Tree Harvesting in Community Forestry—Regulatory Instruments or Forest Bureaucrats’ Discretion?

What Governs Tree Harvesting in Community Forestry—Regulatory Instruments or Forest Bureaucrats’ Discretion?

An Uneven Playing Field: Regulatory Barriers to Communities Making a Living from the Timber from Their Forests–Examples from Cambodia, Nepal and Vietnam

Rapid Silviculture Appraisal to Characterise Stand and Determine Silviculture Priorities of Community Forests in Nepal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About