Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T14:45:26.661Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Institutions and forest management in the Swat region of Pakistan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2013

By
Gideon Kruseman  and
Lorenzo Pellegrini
Edited by
Pieter J. H. van Beukering ,
Elissaios Papyrakis ,
Jetske Bouma  and
Roy Brouwer
Pieter J. H. van Beukering
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Elissaios Papyrakis
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Jetske Bouma
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Roy Brouwer
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Deforestation in the north-western part of Pakistan is a long standing problem. Forest cover was 5% in 1996 compared to 20–25% in 1850 (Sungi 1996). In the district of Swat where the research was focused there is a gap (regrowth minus timbercuttings) of over 300 000 m3 for fuelwood alone (Sungi 1996). Historical accounts tell us that forests have always been an important source of income within the livelihood strategies of local populations (Barth 1985, Sultan-i-Rome 2005). Where in the past the vast expanses of forests could support these demands, high levels of population growth (doubling of the population every 15–20 years) coupled by deforestation have drastically altered the picture. Today, the local population faces ever-decreasing forest stocks with increasing threats to both the local communities (landslides, erosion) and downstream beneficiaries of the watersheds as well as increasing threats to biodiversity.

In a broader perspective, Angelsen and Wunder (2003) distinguish five dimensions in which poor people benefit from forests and forest products: the type of beneficiaries, types of forest products and services provided, the role of forest benefits within the households strategy (subsistence versus commercial use), type of natural resource management (ranging from pure natural forest extraction to (re)planted forests) and high or low return products.

Type
Chapter
Information
Nature's Wealth
The Economics of Ecosystem Services and Poverty
 , pp. 234 - 258
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmed, A. S. (1980). Pukhtun Economy and Society: Traditional Structure and Economic Development in a Tribal Society. London: Boston, Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Amman, H. and Duraiappah, A. (2004). Land tenure and conflict resolution: a game theoretic approach in the Narok district in Kenya. Environment and Development Economics, 9: 383–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angelsen, A. and Kaimowitz, D. (1999). Rethinking the causes of deforestation: lessons from economic models. The World Bank Research Observer, 14(1): 73–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Angelsen, A. and Wunder, S. (2003). Exploring the forest-poverty link. Key concepts, issues and research implications. CIFOR Working Paper. Bogor, Indonesia.
Baland, J. M. and Platteau, J. P. (1997). Coordination problems in local-level resource management. Journal of Development Economics, 53(1): 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baland, J. M. and Platteau, J. P. (1998). Wealth inequality and efficiency in the commons, part II: the regulated case. Oxford Economic Papers, 50(1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, C. B., & Swallow, B. M. (2006). Fractal poverty traps. World Development, 34: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barth, F. (1985). The Last Wali of Swat. Bangkok, Thailand: White Orchid Press.Google Scholar
Bromley, D. W. (1991). Environment and Economy: Property Rights and Public Policy. Oxford and Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Furubotn, E. G. and Richter, R. (1997). Institutions and Economic Theory: The Contribution of the New Institutional Economics. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Hardin, G. (1968). Tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859): 1243–1248.Google ScholarPubMed
Johnston, M. (2005). Syndromes of Corruption: Wealth, Power, and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kabubo-Mariara, J. (2004), Poverty, property rights and socio-economic incentives for land conservation: the case for Kenya. African Journal of Economic Policy, 11(1): 35–68.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A. and Mastruzzi, M. (2005). Governance matters IV: governance indicators for 1996–2004. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series. World Bank. Washington DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, S. R., Bokhari, S. and Cheema, M. A. (2004). Resource rights and sustainable livelihoods: a case study of Pakistan’s Dir-Kohistan forests. International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). Islamabad, Pakistan.Google Scholar
Khan, S. R. and Khan, S. R. (2009). Assessing poverty–deforestation links: evidence from Swat, Pakistan. Ecological Economics, 68(10): 2607–2618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Killeen, D. and Khan, S. R. (2001). Poverty and environment. Opinion: World Summit on Sustainable Development. International Institute for Environment and Development, London.Google Scholar
Meinzen-Dick, R. and Pradhan, R. (2002). Legal pluralism and dynamic property rights. CAPRi Working Paper, no. 22. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington DC.Google Scholar
Naqvi, S. N. H., Khan, M. H. and Chaudhry, M. G. (1987). Land Reforms in Pakistan: A Historical Perspective. Islamabad, Pakistan: Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.Google Scholar
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellegrini, L. (2011). Corruption, Development and the Environment. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlager, E. and Ostrom, E. (1992). Property-rights regimes and natural-resources: a conceptual analysis. Land Economics, 68(3): 249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Social Policy and Development Centre (SPDC) (2001). Social Development in Pakistan: Annual Review 2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Steimann, B. (2004). Decentralization and participation in the forestry sector of NWFP, Pakistan: the role of the state. IP6 Working Paper. Swiss National Centre for Competence in Research, Islamabad Pakistan.Google Scholar
Suleri, A. Q. (2002). Regional study on forest policy and institutional reforms: final report of the Pakistan case study. Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines.Google Scholar
Sultan-i-Rome (2005). Forestry in the princely state of Swat and Kalam (North-West Pakistan). IP6 Working Paper, Swiss National Centre for Competence in Research, Islamabad, Pakistan.Google Scholar
Sungi, (1996). Forests, Laws and People: A Focus on Hazara. Peshawar, Pakistan: Sungi Development Foundation.Google Scholar
Transparency International (2002). Corruption in South Asia: Insights and Benchmarks from Citizen Feedback Surveys in Five Countries. Berlin: Transparency International.Google Scholar
Transparency International (2004). Corruption Perceptions Index 2004. Berlin: Transparency International.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York and London: Free Press and Collier Macmillan.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (2000). The new institutional economics: taking stock, looking ahead. Journal of Economic Literature, 38(3): 595–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×