Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based Restoration
Ecosystem services are important for human well-being; yet, their valuation poses significant challenges, particularly in the context of benefit–cost analyses (BCA) for ecosystem restoration. This is because most ecosystem services are not bought or sold directly on the market. This study systemati...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nandan Nawn
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Ecology, Economy and Society – The INSEE Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ecoinsee.org/journal/ojs/index.php/ees/article/view/1169 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832572668423962624 |
|---|---|
| author | Sony Baral Aayoush Raj Regmi Khagendra P. Joshi Kishor Atreya |
| author_facet | Sony Baral Aayoush Raj Regmi Khagendra P. Joshi Kishor Atreya |
| author_sort | Sony Baral |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Ecosystem services are important for human well-being; yet, their valuation poses significant challenges, particularly in the context of benefit–cost analyses (BCA) for ecosystem restoration. This is because most ecosystem services are not bought or sold directly on the market. This study systematically reviews the cost and benefit parameters used in BCA and highlights the limitations in accounting for the social benefits of community-based forest restoration programmes. Of a total of 500 research articles, 41 met our inclusion criteria, with only 11 focusing on community-managed projects. The analysis reveals that transaction costs are often underrepresented, while timber resources and carbon sequestration are prioritized. Common valuation methods include the direct market price approach (46%) and benefit transfer (63%). The economic analysis shows a higher median benefit–cost ratio for general forest management projects (2.24) compared to community-managed programmes (1.65). These findings underscore the need to refine BCA variables and enhance economic efficiency in community forest restoration efforts.
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-1ccec25deecb487fbd0f44322467e75a |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2581-6152 2581-6101 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Nandan Nawn |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Ecology, Economy and Society – The INSEE Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-1ccec25deecb487fbd0f44322467e75a2025-02-02T08:23:14ZengNandan NawnEcology, Economy and Society – The INSEE Journal2581-61522581-61012025-01-018110.37773/ees.v8i1.1169Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based RestorationSony Baral0Aayoush Raj Regmi1Khagendra P. Joshi2Kishor Atreya3Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, NepalSchool of Forestry & NRM and Institute of Forestry, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, NepalInstitute of Forestry, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, NepalSchool of Forestry & NRM, Balkhu Kathmandu and Institute of Forestry, Pokhara Campus, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal Ecosystem services are important for human well-being; yet, their valuation poses significant challenges, particularly in the context of benefit–cost analyses (BCA) for ecosystem restoration. This is because most ecosystem services are not bought or sold directly on the market. This study systematically reviews the cost and benefit parameters used in BCA and highlights the limitations in accounting for the social benefits of community-based forest restoration programmes. Of a total of 500 research articles, 41 met our inclusion criteria, with only 11 focusing on community-managed projects. The analysis reveals that transaction costs are often underrepresented, while timber resources and carbon sequestration are prioritized. Common valuation methods include the direct market price approach (46%) and benefit transfer (63%). The economic analysis shows a higher median benefit–cost ratio for general forest management projects (2.24) compared to community-managed programmes (1.65). These findings underscore the need to refine BCA variables and enhance economic efficiency in community forest restoration efforts. https://ecoinsee.org/journal/ojs/index.php/ees/article/view/1169Community Managed ForestsValuation TechniquesBenefit Cost AnalysisRestoration |
| spellingShingle | Sony Baral Aayoush Raj Regmi Khagendra P. Joshi Kishor Atreya Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based Restoration Ecology, Economy and Society – The INSEE Journal Community Managed Forests Valuation Techniques Benefit Cost Analysis Restoration |
| title | Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based Restoration |
| title_full | Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based Restoration |
| title_fullStr | Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based Restoration |
| title_full_unstemmed | Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based Restoration |
| title_short | Methodological Accounting of the Ecosystem Services Benefits of Community-based Restoration |
| title_sort | methodological accounting of the ecosystem services benefits of community based restoration |
| topic | Community Managed Forests Valuation Techniques Benefit Cost Analysis Restoration |
| url | https://ecoinsee.org/journal/ojs/index.php/ees/article/view/1169 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sonybaral methodologicalaccountingoftheecosystemservicesbenefitsofcommunitybasedrestoration AT aayoushrajregmi methodologicalaccountingoftheecosystemservicesbenefitsofcommunitybasedrestoration AT khagendrapjoshi methodologicalaccountingoftheecosystemservicesbenefitsofcommunitybasedrestoration AT kishoratreya methodologicalaccountingoftheecosystemservicesbenefitsofcommunitybasedrestoration |