Financial Assessment of Forest Management Systems in the Community Forests: A Case Study from the Midhills of Nepal

Bijendra Basnyat

doi:10.1155/2020/7256217

Abstract

In Nepal, forest management priority is shifting to scientific management from conventional management. Though, the forest officials claims that scientific management is beneficial to the forest user groups, comparative financial assessment with conventional management remains unexplored. Following a case study approach, this study compares financial efficiency of two forest management systems in the community forests, focusing on benefit-cost ratio. The study conducted documents review, focus group discussions, and rapid survey to quantify costs and benefits from each forest management system. Conventional management gave a higher benefit-cost ratio to the forest user groups, irrespective of whether forest products are sold at a subsidized price or par with the market price. However, scientific management required high forest management costs and thus had a lower benefit-cost ratio. Sensitivity analysis between two systems revealed that conventional management gave a higher benefit-cost ratio in all cases. The study concludes that forest user groups would bear financial loss if they do not fix the price of the timber at par with the market in scientific management, and in such a case, the tagged price will be beyond affordability of the forest users. Furthermore, scientific management has discouraged kind contribution of users in managing forest. Besides, social and environmental consequences of scientific management cannot be ignored. Hence, the study argues for reconsidering current scientific management considering likely economic and social consequences to the forest user groups.

Highlights

Scientific forestry involves managing forests based on the “principles of sustained yield” by conducting systematic surveys, developing management plans based on growth statistics, and annual sustained harvesting [1]
Our analysis reveals that Scientific Forest Management (SciFM) is beneficial if promoted for commercial purposes, whereas conventional forest management (ConvFM) for subsistence use
SciFM is beneficial to forest user groups, since net present value is positive and high compared to ConvFM

Summary

Introduction

Scientific forestry involves managing forests based on the “principles of sustained yield” by conducting systematic surveys, developing management plans based on growth statistics, and annual sustained harvesting [1]. E legacy of this practice still dominates in the era of the present-day participatory forestry, even in the community forests of Nepal [3, 4]. It has become a precondition for devolving forest management authority in the global south [3, 5]. In 1995, the Community Forest Directive was formulated, which required a simple plan without inventory, integrating forest management rules with the users, allowing them to collect dead, dying, and diseased trees mostly in fallen trees. The forest act was amended in 1999, which introduced inventory-based forest management planning in the community forests. In 2000, Community forestry Inventory Guideline was enacted (amended in 2004), which required to estimate the growing stock volume and annual increment in the community

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion