2003•Journal of Forest and LivelihoodOpen access

Why aren't Poor People Benefiting More from Community Forestry?

Y.B. Malla

Open full text 120 citations

Abstract

This paper summarizes the findings of a socio-economic baseline study undertaken amongst four Forest User Groups (FUGs) in Nepal focusing on levels of participation, understanding of, and benefit from, community forestry activities. Poorer households were found to benef it significantly less than wealthier households, and in some cases may even be directly disadvantaged by the advent of community forestry in their villages. A major cause of this inequity is that FUG committees are dominated by wealthier households. In addition, awareness levels of a range of community forestry and FUG institutional issues is low, particularly amongst the poorest groups. Forests are being managed below their productive potential and only a limited proportion of members’ forest product needs come from community forests.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This paper summarizes the findings of a socio-economic baseline study undertaken amongst four Forest User Groups (FUGs) in Nepal focusing on levels of participation, understanding of, and benefit from, community forestry activities. Poorer households were found to benef it significantly less than wealthier households, and in some cases may even be directly disadvantaged by the advent of community forestry in their villages. A major cause of this inequity is that FUG committees are dominated by wealthier households. In addition, awareness levels of a range of community forestry and FUG institutional issues is low, particularly amongst the poorest groups. Forests are being managed below their productive potential and only a limited proportion of members’ forest product needs come from community forests.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 120 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This paper summarizes the findings of a socio-economic baseline study undertaken amongst four Forest User Groups (FUGs) in Nepal focusing on levels of participation, understanding of, and benefit from, community forestry activities. Poorer households were found to benef it significantly less than wealthier households, and in some cases may even be directly disadvantaged by the advent of community forestry in their villages. A major cause of this inequity is that FUG committees are dominated by wealthier households. In addition, awareness levels of a range of community forestry and FUG institutional issues is low, particularly amongst the poorest groups. Forests are being managed below their productive potential and only a limited proportion of members’ forest product needs come from community forests.

Key concepts: Community forestry, Disadvantaged, Forest product, Forestry, Business, Baseline (sea), Product (mathematics), Economic growth

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Why aren't Poor People Benefiting More from Community Forestry? — Research Paper | ScholarLens