UDTR Global Rights of Nature Radar

Feminist Institutionalist Interpretation of Forest Tenure Regimes in Nepal

Identification

Public canonical key

doi:10.3126/jfl.v15i1.23095

Authors

Radha Wagle · Deepa Oli · Basana Sapkota · Saraswati Aryal · Sabina Maiya Prajapati

Reported year

2017

Reported language

en

Source type

article

First detected

2026-11-09T19:13:38.728183+00:00

Last metadata observation

2026-11-09T19:13:38.728183+00:00

Last HTTP verification

Not checked

Institutions reported by the source

ActionAid · Monash University

Documentary abstract — original language

Forest tenure reform is one of the key agenda for sustainable forest governance. But forest tenure is not gender neutral. We examine various forest tenure regimes of Nepal from feminist institutionalist approach and explore, to what extent, each regime recognises the right of women to forest tenure. Five community-based forest tenure regimes, namely community forest, pro-poor leasehold forest, collaborative forest, buffer zone community forest and conservation area are taken into account for assessing gender dimension. Historical changes and continuity are presented in forestry governance in terms of women’s bundle of rights over forest resources across three key phases – before 1950s, from 1950s to 1970s and from 1970s onward. Formal and informal institutions in each of the five tenure regimes were analysed and we found that the formal institutions in community forestry recognises the roles of the women in forest tenure, but those in other regimes and informal rules in all the regimes, by and large, prevent women from having access to and control over forest resource decisions. Emerging aspects of forestry, mainly forest-based enterprises and REDD+ have not been able to address gender issues properly. Some recommendations are made for gender equality in forest tenure regimes.

Identifiers

OPENALEX

W2921785848

DOI

10.3126/jfl.v15i1.23095

Documentary context

Documentary family

Scholarship

Source-reported types

article

Jurisdictions studied — explicit sources

NP

Natural entities mentioned

Forest

Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.

Sources

OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.3126/jfl.v15i1.23095
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W2921785848

Documented bibliographic relations

Source-declared references and links; they do not establish legal support or UGLC qualification. Up to 20 outgoing references are displayed.

• openalex:w1899501942 · CITES
• openalex:w1922948941 · CITES
• openalex:w1975173648 · CITES
• openalex:w1982375826 · CITES
• openalex:w2005066455 · CITES
• openalex:w2020594458 · CITES
• openalex:w2077771621 · CITES
• openalex:w2092365764 · CITES
• openalex:w2096161807 · CITES
• openalex:w2096803083 · CITES
• Gender and Sustainable Forest Management in East Africa and Latin America · CITES
• openalex:w2111741047 · CITES
• openalex:w2141513161 · CITES
• Gender Equality Challenges to the REDD+ Initiative in Nepal · CITES
• openalex:w2153741325 · CITES
• openalex:w2292753161 · CITES
• openalex:w4213166689 · CITES
• openalex:w4236476203 · CITES
• openalex:w4255747494 · CITES
• openalex:w4300605200 · CITES

1 incoming references within the detected corpus

Documentary status

Relevance pending

Library

This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.