Bureaucratic recentralisation of Nepal's community forestry sector
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Bureaucratic recentralisation of Nepal's community forestry sector. / Basnyat, B.; Treue, T.; Pokharel, R. K.
I: International Forestry Review, Bind 21, Nr. 4, 2019, s. 401-415.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Bureaucratic recentralisation of Nepal's community forestry sector
AU - Basnyat, B.
AU - Treue, T.
AU - Pokharel, R. K.
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - This paper explores the forest bureaucracy's practices of implementing community forest policies in Nepal and how this shapes the realities of community forestry for forest user groups. To this end, we conducted a content analysis of community forest management plans; surveyed 74 community forest user groups; conducted intensive field observation in six community forests and interacted with executive committee members and forest bureaucrats from two western hill districts. Our results show that forest user groups were hardly aware of their formal rights, including the obligations of forest bureaucrats to deliver free-of-charge services and technical support. Nobody holds forest bureaucrats accountable for failing to fulfil this part of their official duties. Rather, the forest bureaucrats have established different legal and extralegal processes and mechanisms through which they regain and maintain control over community forest resources. We call this 'bureaucratic recentralisation', and it allows forest bureaucrats to reap personal benefits, including unofficial revenues for delivering statutorily no-cost services.
AB - This paper explores the forest bureaucracy's practices of implementing community forest policies in Nepal and how this shapes the realities of community forestry for forest user groups. To this end, we conducted a content analysis of community forest management plans; surveyed 74 community forest user groups; conducted intensive field observation in six community forests and interacted with executive committee members and forest bureaucrats from two western hill districts. Our results show that forest user groups were hardly aware of their formal rights, including the obligations of forest bureaucrats to deliver free-of-charge services and technical support. Nobody holds forest bureaucrats accountable for failing to fulfil this part of their official duties. Rather, the forest bureaucrats have established different legal and extralegal processes and mechanisms through which they regain and maintain control over community forest resources. We call this 'bureaucratic recentralisation', and it allows forest bureaucrats to reap personal benefits, including unofficial revenues for delivering statutorily no-cost services.
KW - accountability
KW - benefits
KW - control
KW - forest bureaucrats
KW - recentralisation
U2 - 10.1505/146554819827906861
DO - 10.1505/146554819827906861
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85076729034
VL - 21
SP - 401
EP - 415
JO - International Forestry Review
JF - International Forestry Review
SN - 1465-5489
IS - 4
ER -
ID: 232978052