The paper deals with issues of taxation in relation to decentralisation of forest resources. It presents preliminary empirical data from Tanzania in the form of forest taxation records from 12 villages that have gained jurisdiction over forest products taxation through a decentralisation reform. The analysis shows that (i) decentralisation of forest resources can lead to vast improvements of taxation effectiveness and (ii) taxation of forest products may be regressive or progressive in relation to income distribution. Thus, the effects of increased forest taxation effectiveness on poverty alleviation are ambiguous and highly dependent upon the local pattern of forest utilisation. The indication that forest decentralisation can lead to higher effectiveness in the taxation of forest products contradicts some of the general debate on the effects and potentials of decentralisation on taxation, and, hence, provides an argument for continued decentralisation of natural resources.

Valuation studies about environmental goods, e.g. biodiversity, often use characteristics and indicators that seem ecologically sound. But ecological value and public value are not necessarily the same. Therefore, combining ecological indicators with public knowledge and language in framing valuation studies may improve the consistency of outcomes. Using both qualitative and quantitative methods, we investigated lay people’s mental constructs about biodiversity and attitudes to biodiversity management. Applying a coding strategy for analysing data from individual interviews and group discussions revealed that ‘diversity of animals and plants’, ‘natural appearance and dynamics of ecosystem’, and ‘peace and quietness’ were the attributes of forest ecosystems most frequently mentioned by lay people. In addition, it was found that regardless of familiarity with the various ecological scientific terminologies, lay people had an intuitive understanding of ecological concepts such as biodiversity. The analyses demonstrated that individuals’ perceptions and values of biodiversity could be framed in two interlinking categories: (i) as a good in itself, and (ii) its regulatory function. It was also revealed that individuals’ attitudes towards forests and their biodiversity may be rooted in their mental constructs and can be useful in targeting policy and conservation management.

Forests are important to the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people in developing countries. This study contributes to the emerging body of quantitative knowledge on the economic importance of forests to rural households through a study in the Nepal Himalaya. Qualitative contextual information was collected in six villages, followed by a structured household (n=180) survey that included four quarterly income surveys. The average forest income share of total annual household income was 22%, ranging from 12 to 31%. For all income groups, the level of forest income exceeded (except for livestock income for the most well-off income quartile) income from each of agricultural products and livestock products. In absolute terms, the level of forest income increased with total income. Forest income mainly supports current consumption. Determinants of household absolute and relative forest income were available labour, education, and location. The number of livestock units and degree of debt had positive effects on absolute forest income, while the size of remittances and savings had negative effects on forest dependency. Income diversification was the norm for all income groups. There is also clear evidence of differential income diversification both across and within income sources. The consequences for policy-makers are briefly discussed.

Forests contribute to livelihoods of rural people throughout the tropics. This paper adds to the emerging body of quantitative knowledge on absolute and relative economic importance, through both cash and subsistence income, of moist forests to households. Qualitative contextual information was collected in six villages in lowland Bolivia, followed by a structured survey of randomly selected households (n = 118) that included four quarterly income surveys. We employed a novel data collection approach that allows detailed estimation of total household accounts, including sources of forest income. We estimated the average forest income share of total annual household income (forest dependency) at 20%, ranging from 18 to 24%. Adding environmental income increased the average to 26%, being fairly constant across income quartiles at 24–28%. Absolute levels of forest income increased with total household income, while forest dependency was the highest in the best-off income quartile—the primary harvesters of forest products are better-off households. The pattern of high forest dependency among better-off households has also been reported from other countries, indicating that this pattern may be more common than advocated by conventional wisdom. Using ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions, we found significant determinants of absolute forest income to be household size, sex of household head and area of cultivated land; the significant determinants for forest dependency were level of education, whether household head was born in village and whether household was food self-sufficient. Better-off households were able to realise cash income from forests, while poorer households—in particular if headed by women—were more reliant on subsistence forest income. We argue that the differential patterns of forest income across income quartiles should be considered in future development interventions and that findings indicate a potential for forests to contribute to moving households out of poverty.

Among the objectives of afforestation projects, carbon sequestration is attracting increasing political attention. Therefore, there is a need for understanding the carbon sequestration ‘mechanism’ and for ex-ante assessment of the sequestration potential of afforestation projects. Such assessment must be based on parameter estimates that are inherently uncertain, making the basis for applying an advanced sequestration model weak. This paper presents a transparent, simple and general model for quantification of the carbon sequestration in afforestation projects. The model can easily be modified so as to fit specific conditions, and it is held sufficiently reliable when taking into account the ex-ante character of the decision problem. The use of the model is exemplified by application to a yield table for Sitka spruce. Limitations of the model framework and its application in combination with scenarios of climate change are discussed.

Rural households throughout the Himalayas are regarded as dependent on non-timber forest products (NTFPs), but very few studies have quantified this dependency. This case study, undertaken in two villages in the Central Himalayan foot hills in Nepal, documents the absolute and relative importance of commercial NTFPs to rural household economies. Data were collected in a one-year period and included interviews with 250 households using a semi-structured questionnaire and monthly interviews with four sub-local NTFP traders, two local traders and two central wholesalers. The conservative estimate of NTFP-derived cash income showed this to be a cornerstone in poorer household livelihood strategies and thus in poverty prevention. An annual average of 578 kg of commercial NTFPs was collected in the wild per household, providing poorer households with a cash income share of 44–78%. Better off households are not NTFP dependent but rely on income from crop production and livestock. Based on a net marketing margin analysis, showing that harvesters capture a large share of the Indian wholesaler price, it is argued that there is scope for pursuing NTFP-based strategies for poverty reduction through leasehold forestry and agroforestry. Both these options are compatible with conserving forest cover and forest corridor functions and may thus present a win–win scenario for livelihood improvement and conservation.