Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:28:45.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resilience of community forestry under conditions of armed conflict in Nepal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2010

BIRENDRA K. KARNA ,
GANESH P. SHIVAKOTI  and
EDWARD L. WEBB
BIRENDRA K. KARNA*
Affiliation:
School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, PO Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand
GANESH P. SHIVAKOTI
Affiliation:
School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, PO Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand
EDWARD L. WEBB
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, 14 Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543
*
*Correspondence: Birendra K. Karna e-mail: birendra.kumar.karna@ait.ac.th
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Armed conflicts pose a serious and potentially long-term threat to institutions, societies and environments across the world. This study focuses on the small mountainous country of Nepal, which has experienced high levels of armed conflict for many years. This paper analyses the relationship between local forest institutions, institutional embeddedness and forest condition under conditions of active armed conflict. Seven community forest user groups with similar forest governance structure were examined, located in similar biophysical and ecological zones, but experiencing different degrees of conflict. Those forest user groups facing severe armed conflict showed a decline in institutional arrangements but improvements in characteristics of institutional embeddedness, such as trust and reciprocity, whereas the forest user groups in low conflict environments had more stable institutional arrangements and stable embeddedness characteristics. Both types of locations showed an increase in forest density. These results emphasize the capacity of local institutions to organize and cooperate even in extremely vulnerable situations, building trust and reciprocity for sustainable forest use and management.

Keywords

armed conflictcommunity forestryforest conditioninstitutional embeddednesslocal institutions
Type
Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , June 2010 , pp. 201 - 209
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agrawal, A. (2003) Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: context, methods, and politics. Annual Reviews in Anthropology 32: 243–246.Google Scholar
Alvarez, M.D. (2005) Colombia: the many faces of the war.ETFRN and European Commission News 43–44/05, pp. 63–65 [www document]. URL http://www.etfrn.org/ETFRN/newsletter/news4344/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Andersson, K. & Gibson, C.C. (2006) Decentralized governance and environmental change: local institutional moderation of deforestation in Bolivia. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 26: 99–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ARD (2006) Conflict over natural resources at the community level in Nepal including its relationship to armed conflict. Report to USAID, USA [www document]. URL http://www.forestconflict.com/documents/reports/NepalNatResConflict-Report.pdfGoogle Scholar
Banana, A. & Gombya-Ssembajjwe, W. (2000) Successful forest management: the importance of security of tenure and rule enforcement in Ugandan forests. In: People and Forest: Communities, Institutions, and Governance, ed. Gibson, C., McKean, M. & Ostrom, E., pp. 87–98. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banjade, M. & Timsina, N. (2005) Impact of armed conflict in community forestry of Nepal. ETFRN and European Commission News 43–44/05, pp. 81–83 [www document]. URL http://www.etfrn.org/ETFRN/newsletter/news4344/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Baral, N. & Heinen, J.T. (2006) The Maoist people's war and conservation in Nepal. Politics and the Life Science 24: 2–11.Google Scholar
Bhattarai, B.R. (2003) The political economy of the people's war. In: The People's War in Nepal: Left Perspectives, ed. Karki, A. & Seddon, D., pp. 117–164. Delhi, India: Adroit Publishers.Google Scholar
Bhurtel, J. & Ali, H.S. (2006) The green roots of red rebellion: environmental degradation and the rise of the Maoist movement in Nepal [www document]. URL http://http://www.uvm.edu/~shali/Maoist.pdfGoogle Scholar
BK, K.N., Shrestha, R.K. & Acharya, S.G. (2009) Maoist conflict, community forestry and livelihood: pro-poor innovations in forest management in Nepal. Report. Forest Action Discussion Paper 2009/3, Kathmandu, Nepal [www document] URL http://www.forestrynepal.org/publications/article/4151Google Scholar
Black, R.H., Schafer, J.E. & Watson, E. (2005) Natural resources management and local institutions in ‘post-conflict’ Mozambique and Ethiopia. ETFRN and European Commission News 43–44/05, pp. 54–57 [www document]. URL http://www.etfrn.org/ETFRN/newsletter/news4344/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Bohle, H. & Funfgeld, H. (2007) The political ecology of violence in Eastern Sri Lanka. Development and Change 38: 665–687.Google Scholar
Collier, P. (1999) On the economic consequences of civil war. Oxford Economic Papers 51: 168–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dietz, T., Ostrom, E. & Stern, P.C. (2003) The struggle to govern the commons. Science 302: 1907–1911.Google Scholar
Dorji, L. (2003) Assessing the evolution, status, and future implication of forestry resources management in the inner Himalayans of the Kingdom of Bhutan. Ph.D. thesis, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand.Google Scholar
Fisher, R.J. (2000) Decentralization and devolution of forest management: a conceptual overview. In: Decentralization and Devolution of Forest Management in Asia and the Pacific, ed. Enters, T., Durst, P.B. & Victor, M.. RECOFTC Report No 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1. Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
Gautam, A.P. & Shivakoti, G.P. (2005) Condition for successful local collective action in forestry: some evidence from the Hills of Nepal. Society and Natural Resources, 18: 158–171.Google Scholar
Gautam, A.P., Shivakoti, G.P. & Webb, E.L. (2004) A review of forest policies, institutions, and the resource condition in Nepal. International Forestry Review 6: 136–148.Google Scholar
Gibson, C.C. & Koontz, T. (1998) When community is not enough: institutions and values in community-based forest management in southern Indiana. Human Ecology 26: 621–47.Google Scholar
Gibson, C.C., McKean, M. & Ostrom, E. (2000) Explaining deforestation: the role of local institutions. In: People and Forest: Communities, Institutions, and Governance, ed. Gibson, C., McKean, M. & Ostrom, E., pp. 1–26. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hanley, J., Orbell, J. & Morikawa, T. (2003) Conflict, interpersonal assessment, and the evolution of cooperation: simulation results. In: Trust and Reciprocity, ed. Ostrom, E. & Walker, J., pp. 170–206. NY, USA: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Harbinson, R. (1992) Burma's forests fall victim to war. The Ecologist 22: 72–73.Google Scholar
Hayes, T.M. (2006) Parks, people, and forest protection: an institutional assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas. World Development 34: 2064–2075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Igbatayo, S.A. (2005) Nigeria: armed conflict and its implications for forest management in the Niger Delta. ETFRN and European Commission News 43–44/ 05, pp. 52–54 [www document]. URL http://www.etfrn.org/ETFRN/newsletter/news4344/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Jager, W., Janssen, M.A & Vlek, C.A.J. (2002) How uncertainty stimulates over-harvesting in a resource dilemma: three process explanations. Journal of Environmental Psychology 22: 247–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jong, W.J., Donovan, D. & Abe, I.K. (2005) Underlying causes of extreme conflict and tropical forests. ETFRN and European Commission News 43–44/05, pp. 14–16 [www document]. URL http://www.etfrn.org/ETFRN/newsletter/news4344/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Kaimowitz, D. & Faune, A. (2003) Armed movements and forest conservation in Nicaragua's Bosawas Biosphere Reserve. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 16: 21–47.Google Scholar
Kanel, K.R. (2004) Twenty five year's of community forestry: contribution to millennium development goals. In: Proceedings of the Fourth National Workshop on Community Forestry, held in Kathmandu, August 4–6. Department of Forest, Kathmandu, Nepal.Google Scholar
Katel, B.K., Paudel, K., Ojha, H. & Brid, P. (2005) A survey of the priority problems of the forest and tree dependent poor people in Nepal during a time of conflict: caught in the cross-fire. Report. Forest Action, Kathmandu, Nepal, and DFID, UK.Google Scholar
Khanal, D.R. (2006) Impacts of armed conflict on community-based natural resources management system in Nepal [www document]. URL http://www.iascp.org/bali/papers.htmlGoogle Scholar
McCabe, K.A. (2003) A cognitive theory of reciprocal exchange. In: Trust and Reciprocity, ed. Ostrom, E. & Walker, J., pp. 147–169. NY, USA: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
McNeely, J.A. (2003) Biodiversity, war, and tropical forests. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 16: 1–20.Google Scholar
Nagendra, H. (2002) Tenure and forest conditions: community forestry in the Nepal Terai. Environmental Conservation 29: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagendra, H., Karna, B. & Karmacharya, M. (2005) Examining institutional change: social conflict in Nepal's leasehold forestry program. Conservation and Society 3: 72–91.Google Scholar
Nepali, S. (2005) Impacts of a political conflict in conservation and livelihoods. Report to WWF-Nepal program, Kathmandu, Nepal.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2003) Toward a behavioral theory linking trust, reciprocity, and reputation. In: Trust and Reciprocity, ed. Ostrom, E. & Walker, J., pp. 19–79. NY, USA: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2005) Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. & Nagendra, H. (2007) Tenure alone is not sufficient: monitoring is essential. Environmental Economic and Policy Studies 8: 175–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. & Wertime, M.B. (2000) International forestry resources and institutions research strategy. In: People and Forest: Communities, Institutions, and Governance, ed. Gibson, C., McKean, M., & Ostrom, E., pp. 1–26 Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Paudel, K.P. & Kattel, B. (2006) Caught in the crossfire: forest-dependent poor people in Nepal. Journal of Forest and Livelihood 5: 14–21.Google Scholar
Plumptre, A.J. (2003) Lessons learned from on-the-ground conservation in Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 16: 71–91.Google Scholar
Thoms, C.A. (2007) Constituting forest communities in the hills of Nepal. The International Journal of Biodiversity Science and Management 3: 115–125.Google Scholar
Tucker, C.M., Randolph, J.C. & Castellanos, E.J. (2007) Institutions, biophysical factors and history: an integrative analysis of private and common property forests in Guatemala and Honduras. Human Ecology 35: 259–274.Google Scholar
Upreti, B.R. (2004) The Price of Neglect: from Resources Conflict to Maoist Insurgency in the Himalayan Kingdom. Kathmandu, Nepal: Bhrikuti Academic Publications.Google Scholar
Varughese, G. & Ostrom, E. (2001) The contested role of heterogeneity in collective action: some evidence from community forestry in Nepal. World Development 29: 747–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, E.L. & Gautam, A.P. (2001) Effects of community forest management on the structure and diversity of a successional broadleaf forest in Nepal. International Forestry Review 3: 146–157.Google Scholar
Webb, E.L. & Sah, R.N. (2003) Plant diversity in natural forest, successional forest, and Eucalyptus camaldulensis plantations in the Terai region of Nepal. Forest Ecology and Management 176: 337–353.Google Scholar