TY - BOOK

T1 - Impacts of Community Forest Management and Strictly Protected Areas on Deforestation and Human Well-Being in Madagascar

AU - Rasolofoson, Ranaivo Andriarilala

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Protected areas and Community Forest Management (CFM) are among the most widespreadinterventions to conserve forests in tropical countries. In addition to their impacts on forests and thebiodiversity they contain, these interventions also affect human well-being, particularly that of the localcommunities who are often poor and politically marginalized and whose livelihoods depend directly onthe forest resources being conserved. To develop effective interventions, practitioners need to havecredible, strong and scientifically rigorous evidence on their impacts on forests (or the biodiversity theycontain) and human well-being. However, while scientifically rigorous impact evaluation of programsis well advanced in fields such as development, health and education, it is rare in nature conservation.The rare existing studies focus mostly on protected areas and other interventions, such as CFM, arerelatively untouched by scientifically rigorous impact evaluation.Different challenges account for the limited adoption of rigorous impact evaluation in natureconservation. Among these are the identification and elimination of rival explanations: factors otherthan the intervention that can explain the observed relationship between the intervention and theoutcome. Potential rival explanations are factors that can confound impact estimates by affecting bothassignment of units to intervention and the outcome. Another potential rival explanation is baselineoutcome data that should have been collected before the intervention was implemented. Baseline dataare often missing in conservation studies. Another challenge is the heterogeneity of managementpractices within and units exposed to the same intervention. A challenge pertaining particularly tostudies on human well-being impacts is the multi-dimensional nature of human well-being.In this thesis, I aim to investigate the impacts of different conservation interventions on environmentaland human well-being outcomes while addressing the challenges to conservation impact evaluationdiscussed above. My case studies are CFM and strict protection in Madagascar; one of the world’shottest biodiversity hotspots. I have three specific objectives which are addressed in three manuscriptswith the following titles:i) Effectiveness of CFM at reducing deforestation across Madagascar (manuscript 1): Withcolleagues, I investigated the impacts of CFM on deforestation at the national scale between 2000and 2010 using matching to control for factors confounding impact estimates. We did not detect animpact of CFM, on average, when CFM areas were compared to non-CFM areas, even when thesample was restricted to only where information suggests effective CFM implementation on theground. However, impacts were heterogeneous conditional on whether CFM permits commercialuse of forest resources. No CFM impact was detected where commercial use of natural resources isallowed. However, we did detect some reduction of deforestation in areas managed under CFM thatdoes not permit commercial use, when compared to non-CFM or CFM permitting commercial use.Our findings suggest differentiating among types of CFM is important for estimating the impacts ofthis conservation approach.ii) Impacts of CFM on human economic well-being across Madagascar (manuscript 2): In thismanuscript, we investigated impacts on household living standards across Madagascar as measuredby per capita consumption expenditure. We used matching to control for confounding factors andaddressed the issue of missing baseline values of household consumption expenditures using anapproach known as the placebo test. We cannot statistically reject the hypothesis of zero impact,but we can credibly reject the hypothesis that CFM has had substantial negative impacts oneconomic well-being across CFM communities in Madagascar. There were heterogeneous impacts,with a mixture of positive and negative impacts, conditional on household proximity to forest andeducation level. In conclusion, the impacts of CFM vary with household characteristics: some maylose while others may gain.iii) The potential of the Global Person Generated Index (GPGI) for evaluating the perceived impact ofconservation interventions on subjective well-being (manuscript 3): In this study, we used theGPGI, a subjective and multidimensional well-being instrument, to investigate the relative impactsof strict protection and CFM on human well-being in sites in eastern Madagascar. We used aparticipatory approach to establish the cause-effect relationship between the interventions and theoutcomes (i.e., to eliminate rival explanations). We did not detect statistically significant difference,on average, between the two approaches in three measures we used to examine the magnitude oftheir relative impacts on subjective well-being. However, we found some differences in thecharacteristics of subjective well-being component domains impacted by the strict protection andCFM and in the priority domains that could be targeted by increased resource allocation to improvewell-being in locally meaningful ways. Combined with the participatory approach to establishcause-effect relationship, we suggest GPGI provides highly relevant insight that can be used todesign policy seeking to increase local participation and develop more positive local attitudestowards conservation.The first two manuscripts (1 and 2) involve analyses at the national scale, objective indicators(deforestation and consumption expenditure) and rigorous quantitative causal inference designs makingthem of value to external stakeholders, such as government agencies and donors, seeking to know themagnitude of impacts to inform large scale conservation policy. However, these large scale studies maybe of limited use for project managers who want to build locally legitimate interventions or those whowant a deeper understanding of how conservation interventions affect local people. In the thirdmanuscript, we used a subjective measure of well-being (the GPGI) in combination with participatoryapproach to establish cause-effect relationship between interventions and locally meaningful outcomes.This has limited value for quantitatively measuring the magnitude of impacts; but holds some promisesfor project managers who seek local participation and social sustainability. Conservation has longsuffered from poor quality evaluation of its impacts. This thesis shows that methods for impactevaluation are available, but the appropriate method that should be applied depends, among otherthings, on the purpose of the evaluation.

AB - Protected areas and Community Forest Management (CFM) are among the most widespreadinterventions to conserve forests in tropical countries. In addition to their impacts on forests and thebiodiversity they contain, these interventions also affect human well-being, particularly that of the localcommunities who are often poor and politically marginalized and whose livelihoods depend directly onthe forest resources being conserved. To develop effective interventions, practitioners need to havecredible, strong and scientifically rigorous evidence on their impacts on forests (or the biodiversity theycontain) and human well-being. However, while scientifically rigorous impact evaluation of programsis well advanced in fields such as development, health and education, it is rare in nature conservation.The rare existing studies focus mostly on protected areas and other interventions, such as CFM, arerelatively untouched by scientifically rigorous impact evaluation.Different challenges account for the limited adoption of rigorous impact evaluation in natureconservation. Among these are the identification and elimination of rival explanations: factors otherthan the intervention that can explain the observed relationship between the intervention and theoutcome. Potential rival explanations are factors that can confound impact estimates by affecting bothassignment of units to intervention and the outcome. Another potential rival explanation is baselineoutcome data that should have been collected before the intervention was implemented. Baseline dataare often missing in conservation studies. Another challenge is the heterogeneity of managementpractices within and units exposed to the same intervention. A challenge pertaining particularly tostudies on human well-being impacts is the multi-dimensional nature of human well-being.In this thesis, I aim to investigate the impacts of different conservation interventions on environmentaland human well-being outcomes while addressing the challenges to conservation impact evaluationdiscussed above. My case studies are CFM and strict protection in Madagascar; one of the world’shottest biodiversity hotspots. I have three specific objectives which are addressed in three manuscriptswith the following titles:i) Effectiveness of CFM at reducing deforestation across Madagascar (manuscript 1): Withcolleagues, I investigated the impacts of CFM on deforestation at the national scale between 2000and 2010 using matching to control for factors confounding impact estimates. We did not detect animpact of CFM, on average, when CFM areas were compared to non-CFM areas, even when thesample was restricted to only where information suggests effective CFM implementation on theground. However, impacts were heterogeneous conditional on whether CFM permits commercialuse of forest resources. No CFM impact was detected where commercial use of natural resources isallowed. However, we did detect some reduction of deforestation in areas managed under CFM thatdoes not permit commercial use, when compared to non-CFM or CFM permitting commercial use.Our findings suggest differentiating among types of CFM is important for estimating the impacts ofthis conservation approach.ii) Impacts of CFM on human economic well-being across Madagascar (manuscript 2): In thismanuscript, we investigated impacts on household living standards across Madagascar as measuredby per capita consumption expenditure. We used matching to control for confounding factors andaddressed the issue of missing baseline values of household consumption expenditures using anapproach known as the placebo test. We cannot statistically reject the hypothesis of zero impact,but we can credibly reject the hypothesis that CFM has had substantial negative impacts oneconomic well-being across CFM communities in Madagascar. There were heterogeneous impacts,with a mixture of positive and negative impacts, conditional on household proximity to forest andeducation level. In conclusion, the impacts of CFM vary with household characteristics: some maylose while others may gain.iii) The potential of the Global Person Generated Index (GPGI) for evaluating the perceived impact ofconservation interventions on subjective well-being (manuscript 3): In this study, we used theGPGI, a subjective and multidimensional well-being instrument, to investigate the relative impactsof strict protection and CFM on human well-being in sites in eastern Madagascar. We used aparticipatory approach to establish the cause-effect relationship between the interventions and theoutcomes (i.e., to eliminate rival explanations). We did not detect statistically significant difference,on average, between the two approaches in three measures we used to examine the magnitude oftheir relative impacts on subjective well-being. However, we found some differences in thecharacteristics of subjective well-being component domains impacted by the strict protection andCFM and in the priority domains that could be targeted by increased resource allocation to improvewell-being in locally meaningful ways. Combined with the participatory approach to establishcause-effect relationship, we suggest GPGI provides highly relevant insight that can be used todesign policy seeking to increase local participation and develop more positive local attitudestowards conservation.The first two manuscripts (1 and 2) involve analyses at the national scale, objective indicators(deforestation and consumption expenditure) and rigorous quantitative causal inference designs makingthem of value to external stakeholders, such as government agencies and donors, seeking to know themagnitude of impacts to inform large scale conservation policy. However, these large scale studies maybe of limited use for project managers who want to build locally legitimate interventions or those whowant a deeper understanding of how conservation interventions affect local people. In the thirdmanuscript, we used a subjective measure of well-being (the GPGI) in combination with participatoryapproach to establish cause-effect relationship between interventions and locally meaningful outcomes.This has limited value for quantitatively measuring the magnitude of impacts; but holds some promisesfor project managers who seek local participation and social sustainability. Conservation has longsuffered from poor quality evaluation of its impacts. This thesis shows that methods for impactevaluation are available, but the appropriate method that should be applied depends, among otherthings, on the purpose of the evaluation.

UR - https://soeg.kb.dk/permalink/45KBDK_KGL/fbp0ps/alma99122734783505763

M3 - Ph.D. thesis

BT - Impacts of Community Forest Management and Strictly Protected Areas on Deforestation and Human Well-Being in Madagascar

PB - Department of Food and Resource Economics, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen

ER -