Next Article in Journal
Developing a Scene-Based Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN) Technique for Individual Tree Crown Reconstruction with LiDAR Data
Previous Article in Journal
Research in Forest Biology in the Era of Climate Change and Rapid Urbanization
Open AccessArticle

Scientific Forest Management Practice in Nepal: Critical Reflections from Stakeholders’ Perspectives

Centre for Sustainable Agricultural Systems, University of Southern Queensland, 4350 Queensland, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2020, 11(1), 27; https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010027
Received: 5 November 2019 / Revised: 18 December 2019 / Accepted: 19 December 2019 / Published: 23 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Ecology and Management)
Design and application of context-specific forest management practices with the participation of key stakeholders plays a significant role in sustainable forest management outcomes. However, key forestry stakeholders often hold different, and sometimes conflicting, expectations in relation to forest management policies and management objectives. Applying the triple-perspective typology of stakeholder theory, this paper assessed the evolution of “Scientific Forest Management” (SciFM), a signature programme of the Nepalese Government, as well as its policy processes and explored compatibility, complexity, cost and relative advantages of the adoption of SciFM. The government believes that without this programme, Nepal is losing 91 Million US Dollar (USD) per year. This study revealed that participation of key stakeholders remained contested from the beginning of its implementation, primarily due to differences they held in understanding and interpretation of SciFM. Although stakeholders’ views converged on the potential role of SciFM to increase forest product supply and the domination of timber-centric management, their perspectives differed in nomenclature and implementation modality of SciFM. Primarily, the community forest users and their networks did not own the concept from the beginning, as they were suspicious of recentralization and bureaucratic dominance in forest governance through SciFM. Since historically ingrained skepticism in both government officials and community forest users’ networks towards each other has negatively influenced the trust-building environment, the management of stakeholders’ relations through frequent and meaningful deliberations, and the simplification of bureaucratic procedures in implementation and capacity development of key actors could be instrumental in achieving SciFM objectives. View Full-Text
Keywords: forest policy; sustainable forest management; silviculture; production forest; forest governance; policy adoption forest policy; sustainable forest management; silviculture; production forest; forest governance; policy adoption
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Poudyal, B.H.; Maraseni, T.; Cockfield, G. Scientific Forest Management Practice in Nepal: Critical Reflections from Stakeholders’ Perspectives. Forests 2020, 11, 27.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop