Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya

Summary. — In the past two decades, scholarship on resource use and management has emphasized the key role of institutions, communities, and socio-economic factors. Although much of this writing acknowledges the importance of a large number of different causal variables and processes, knowledge about the magnitude, relative contribution, and even direction of influence of different causal processes on resource management outcomes is still poor at best. This paper addresses existing gaps in theory and knowledge by conducting a context-sensitive statistical analysis of 95 cases of decentralized, community-based, forest governance in Himachal Pradesh, and showing how a range of causal influences shape forest conditions in diverse ecological and institutional settings in the Indian Himalaya. In focusing attention on a large number of cases, but drawing on findings from case studies to motivate our analysis and choice of causal influences, our study seeks to combine the strengths of single case-oriented approaches and larger-N studies, and thereby contributes to a more thorough understanding of effective resource governance. 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

[1]  D. Rocheleau,et al.  Women, Men and Trees: Gender, Power and Property in Forest and Agrarian Landscapes , 1997 .

[2]  Rachel Schurman,et al.  Closing the “Great Divide”: New Social Theory on Society and Nature , 2000 .

[3]  S. Aberg,et al.  [The population explosion]. , 1984, Katilolehti.

[4]  Amy R. Poteete,et al.  Heterogeneity, Group Size and Collective Action: The Role of Institutions in Forest Management , 2004 .

[5]  H. Nagendra,et al.  Accessibility as a determinant of landscape transformation in western Honduras: linking pattern and process , 2003, Landscape Ecology.

[6]  L. Naughton-Treves,et al.  Linking National Agrarian Policy to Deforestation in the Peruvian Amazon: A Case Study of Tambopata, 1986–1997 , 2003, Ambio.

[7]  T. Beckley.  The nestedness of forest dependence: A conceptual framework and empirical exploration , 1998 .

[8]  E. Edmonds.  Government-initiated community resource management and local resource extraction from Nepal's forests , 2002 .

[9]  M. Fisher.  Household welfare and forest dependence in Southern Malawi , 2004, Environment and Development Economics.

[10]  D. Brockway.  Forest plant diversity at local and landscape scales in the Cascade Mountains of southwestern Washington , 1998 .

[11]  Francis N. Gichuki,et al.  More People, Less Erosion: Environmental Recovery in Kenya , 1994 .

[12]  M. Leach,et al.  The Lie of the Land: Challenging Received Wisdom on the African Environment , 1999 .

[13]  R. Wade,et al.  Village Republics: Economic Conditions for Collective Action in South India , 1989 .

[14]  W. Lise.  Factors influencing people's participation in forest management in India , 2000 .

[15]  Elinor Ostrom,et al.  The Contested Role of Heterogeneity in Collective Action: Some Evidence from Community Forestry in Nepal , 2001 .

[16]  Robin Mearns,et al.  The Lie of the Land: Challenging Received Wisdom on the African Environment , 1998 .

[17]  C. Gibson,et al.  Transforming Rural Hunters Into Conservationists: An Assessment of Community-Based Wildlife Management Programs in Africa , 1995 .

[18]  R. Neumann.  Imposing Wilderness: Struggles over Livelihood and Nature Preservation in Africa , 1998 .

[19]  Tony Barnett,et al.  Village Republics: Economic Conditions for Collective Action in South India. , 1990 .

[20]  R. Hinde,et al.  Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action Collective Action , 2010 .

[21]  T. Rudel,et al.  A Tropical Forest Transition? Agricultural Change, Out-migration, and Secondary Forests in the Ecuadorian Amazon , 2002 .

[22]  Shashi Kant,et al.  A dynamic approach to forest regimes in developing economies , 2000 .

[23]  J. H. Goldthorpe,et al.  Current Issues in Comparative Macrosociology: A Debate on Methodological Issues , 1997 .

[24]  E. Ostrom.  How Types of Goods and Property Rights Jointly Affect Collective Action , 2003 .

[25]  D. Pearce,et al.  The Causes of Tropical Deforestation: The Economic and Statistical Analysis of Factors Giving Rise to the Loss of the Tropical Forests , 1996 .

[26]  D. Pearce,et al.  The causes of tropical deforestation : the economic and statistical analysis of factors giving rise to the loss of the tropical forests , 1996 .

[27]  Haripriya Rangan,et al.  Property vs. Control: The State and Forest Management in the Indian Himalaya , 1997 .

[28]  A. Angelsen,et al.  Rethinking the causes of deforestation: lessons from economic models. , 1999, The World Bank research observer.

[29]  A. Agrawal.  Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources , 2001 .

[30]  Craig Johnson,et al.  In the Eyes of the State: Negotiating a “Rights-Based Approach” to Forest Conservation in Thailand , 2002 .

[31]  K. McSweeney.  Who Is “Forest-Dependent”? Capturing Local Variation in Forest-Product Sale, Eastern Honduras , 2002 .

[32]  P. Virtanen.  The Role of Customary Institutions in the Conservation of Biodiversity: Sacred Forests in Mozambique , 2002, Environmental Values.

[33]  D. Armitage.  Socio-institutional dynamics and the political ecology of mangrove forest conservation in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia , 2002 .

[34]  S. Berg.  Local justice. How institutions allocate scarce goods and necessary burdens , 1993 .

[35]  E. Ostrom,et al.  Local Enforcement and Better Forests , 2005, World Development.

[36]  Fikret Berkes,et al.  Common property resources : ecology and community-based sustainable development , 1989 .

[37]  Jon R. Martin,et al.  ASSESSING THE EXTENT TO WHICH ROADLESS AREAS COMPLEMENT THE CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY , 2001 .

[38]  G. Yadama,et al.  How Do Local Institutions Mediate Market and Population Pressures on Resources , 1997 .

[39]  E. Ostrom,et al.  The Struggle to Govern the Commons , 2003, Science.

[40]  M. McKean,et al.  Success on the Commons , 1992 .

[41]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  TURNING THE TABLES: HOW CASE-ORIENTED RESEARCH CHALLENGES VARIABLE-ORIENTED RESEARCH , 1997 .

[42]  Thomas Dietz,et al.  Closing the " Great Divide " : New Social Theory on Society and Nature , 2003 .

[43]  B. Agarwal.  Environmental management, equity and ecofeminism: Debating India's experience , 1998 .

[44]  E. Webb,et al.  Forest Cover Change, Physiography, Local Economy, and Institutions in a Mountain Watershed in Nepal , 2004, Environmental management.

[45]  Jean-Philippe Platteau,et al.  Halting degradation of natural resources: is there a role for rural communities? , 2000 .

[46]  L. Wily.  Reconstructing the African Commons , 2001 .

[47]  M. Sarin.  REGENERATING INDIA'S FORESTS: RECONCILING GENDER EQUITY WITH JOINT FOREST MANAGEMENT , 1995 .

[48]  C. Snider,et al.  The Eyes , 1877, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[49]  Daniel S. Lev.  The Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast Asia . By James C. Scott. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976. Pp. ix, 246. $15.00.) , 1977 .

[50]  J. Southworth,et al.  The Influence of Accessibility, Local Institutions, and Socioeconomic Factors on Forest Cover Change in the Mountains of Western Honduras , 2001 .

[51]  B. Agarwal,et al.  Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework , 2001 .

[52]  F. Berkes.  Rethinking Community‐Based Conservation , 2004 .

[53]  Wil de Jong,et al.  Challenges to Proponents of Common Property Recource Systems: Despairing Voices from the Social Forests of Zimbabwe , 2001 .