Social forestry integrates rural people with forest management in an attempt to improve rural welfare and reverse en- vironmental degradation. Social forestry depends on people, yet the ability to assess opportunities for it is primarily based on tech- nical criteria. Uniform social forestry programs are implemented in communities with different social characteristics without a clear understanding of the effects of those characteristics on people's actions and the outcomes of the program. Based on survey research among eighteen villages in the hilly Chota Nagpur Plateau, southeastern Bihar, India, this paper uses theories of collec- tive action and common property resource management to investigate the relationship between social differentiation, local institu- tional capacity and wealth distribution, and the likelihood of success of private or community-based social forestry strategies. The results provide the basis for distinguishing among communities according to the probable effectiveness of different forms of social forestry, as well as for determining appropriate roles for external organizations interested in promoting social forestry. Addition- ally, the paper includes discussion of other factors such as local leadership, land and tree tenure, relations with external institu- tions, and ecological variation which affect social forestry outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
J. Baker (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: