Efficiency of timber production in community and private forestry in Nepal

This study compares the management performance of timber production among three management systems in Nepal: private forestry, community forestry with collective management, and community forestry with centralized management. While collective management relies entirely on community labor for the who...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environment and development economics 2004-08, Vol.9 (4), p.539-561
Main Authors: SAKURAI, TAKESHI, RAYAMAJHI, SANTOSH, POKHAREL, RIDISH K., OTSUKA, KEIJIRO
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agricultural management
Community
Community forestry
Comparative analysis
Costs
Deforestation
Developing countries
Development economics
Economies of scale
Efficiency
Environmental management
Forest management
Forest protection
Forest resources
Forest soils
Forestry
Hypotheses
Incentives
Labor force
LDCs
Mathematical models
Natural resources
Plantation forestry
Plantations
Private forests
Studies
Timber
Trees
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study compares the management performance of timber production among three management systems in Nepal: private forestry, community forestry with collective management, and community forestry with centralized management. While collective management relies entirely on community labor for the whole management, centralized management uses community labor for the protection of forests and hired labor for silvicultural operations, for example weeding, pruning, and thinning. We found that collective community management is less costly for the protection of planted trees but allocates less labor for the management of trees than private management. We also found that centralized management of natural forests leads to higher revenue and profit than collective management. These findings support the hypothesis that, while collective management is more efficient than private management for the protection of trees due to effective mutual supervision, profit-seeking private management or centralized management is more efficient than collective management for silvicultural operations due to superior work incentives. This study, however, failed to compare efficiency of private and centralized management.
ISSN:1355-770X
1469-4395
DOI:10.1017/S1355770X04001457