Community perceptions: A comparative analysis of community participation in forest management: FSC-certified and non-certified plantations in Mozambique

被引:7
作者
Degnet, Mohammed B. [1 ]
van der Werf, Edwin [1 ,2 ]
Ingram, Verina [3 ]
Wesseler, Justus [4 ]
机构
[1] Wageningen Univ & Res, Environm Econ & Nat Resources Grp, Hollandseweg 1, NL-6706 KN Wageningen, Netherlands
[2] CESifo, D-81679 Munich, Germany
[3] Wageningen Univ & Res, Forest & Nat Conservat Policy Grp, Droevendaalsesteeg 3, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, Netherlands
[4] Wageningen Univ & Res, Agr Econ & Rural Policy Grp, Hollandseweg 1, NL-6706 KN Wageningen, Netherlands
关键词
Forest plantations; Forest certification; Responsible forest management; Weak participation; Mozambique; CERTIFICATION; GOVERNANCE; IMPACTS; DECENTRALIZATION; ENGAGEMENT; BENEFITS; LESSONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102815
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
With the increasing expansion of large-scale forest plantations in developing countries, concerns are rising about relationships between plantations and local communities. Community participation in forest plantation management can improve relationships between forestry companies and adjacent communities and affect the distribution of benefits from plantations. The social dimension of the Forest Stewardship Council's (FSC) responsible forest management standard targets the participation of local communities in plantation management. Using household survey data from villages adjacent to plantations owned by two private forest companies in Mozambique, we assess households' perceptions about their participation in plantations' activities. We compare the perspectives of households in villages adjacent to FSC-certified plantations with those of households in villages adjacent to non-certified plantations. Our quantitative analyses show that communities adjacent to the certified plantations are more likely to perceive that they participate in activities of plantations. In terms of socioeconomic characteristics, male-headed households and households with plantation employees were more likely than their counterparts to participate in plantations' activities. However, we did not find statistically significant relationships between the perceptions of communities near the certified plantations and those near the noncertified plantations regarding their satisfaction with their participation, the extent to which they consider the plantation a 'friendly good neighbor' and whether households have benefitted from the plantations. Our results suggest that market-based approaches of forest governance, such as forest management certification, can complement state policy towards responsible forest management.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 82 条
[11]   Does eco-certification stem tropical deforestation? Forest Stewardship Council certification in Mexico [J].
Blackman, Allen ;
Goff, Leonard ;
Rivera Planter, Marisol .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2018, 89 :306-333
[12]   Producer-Level Benefits of Sustainability Certification [J].
Blackman, Allen ;
Rivera, Jorge .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2011, 25 (06) :1176-1185
[13]   Paradox of empowerment: Reflections on a case study from Northern Ghana [J].
Botchway, K .
WORLD DEVELOPMENT, 2001, 29 (01) :135-153
[14]  
Capistrano D., 2010, Gouverner les forets africaines a l'ere de la mondialisation, P426
[15]   A qualitative meta-synthesis of the benefits of eco-labeling in developing countries [J].
Carlson, Anna ;
Palmer, Charles .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2016, 127 :129-145
[16]   Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How non-state market-driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule-making authority [J].
Cashore, B .
GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION, 2002, 15 (04) :503-529
[17]  
Cashore Benjamin., 2007, Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, V16, P158, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1467-9388.2007.00560.X
[18]  
Cashore Benjamin., 2004, GOVERNING MARKETS FO
[19]  
Cerutti P.O., 2017, International Forestry Review, V19, P50, DOI [DOI 10.17528/CIFOR/004487, 10.17528/cifor/004487]
[20]  
Commission European, 2010, REG EU NO 995 2010 E