You are on page 1of 7


3.1 Introduction This chapter describes the methodology used to achieve the stated Objectives of the research. As per the theme of research, this study utilizes economic contribution of the community forestry in Nepal. The major contents of the methodology, which used in the study, discussed here. 1 Selection of the Re e!rch Are! The Hanspaosha ommunity !orest "ser #roup had been selected for the study because of the following regions$ !"# having different %#As programs. !"#s having the heterogeneous community in respect of household income status. !"#s having more than &''' households. !"#s representing the average management performance as per the ()!O* evaluation record 3."
Re e!rch De i#n

The methods of this research are solely based on participatory approach. onsultation has carried out with ommunity !"# members, )istrict !orest Office and +ased Organization as well as other ,upporting Organizations related to

ommunity forestry in the research area. A case about the e-ercise of community forestry program in the district has been studied. A case study has been one of the most popular research designs used by the social scientist in recent decades. .i/ewise, field methods and case study methods research design are also applied in this research. The diagrammatic order of the research design of present is as follows.


$i#ure 3."% Re e!rch De i#n $r!&e 'or(


3.3 )e!lth R!n(in# 2ealth ran/ing is a set of techni3ue designed to categorize the local criteria of well being. The wealth ran/ing was done by !"#s on the basis of food sufficiency, No. of cattle, other sources of income , structure of house etc. the basic purpose of the wealth ran/ing was to categorize the users into different wealth class. R!n( A *Rich+ Those people who can sell their products after the consumption for a year, people having 0 or more house. They have other sources of income li/e government and non4 government job, pension foreign employment etc. They employed labor for crop production and harvesting. R!n( , *Middle+ Those people who have just sufficient food for a year but not enough to sell. They have only one house. And they don5t have e-ternal income from other jobs. +ut they have cattle. They usually do not employ labors to wor/ on their land. R!n( C *Poor+ Those people who don5t have sufficient food for a year. They have small thatched house or house less. %n some cases, they don5t have any land. They wor/ as labor for whole year in the others5 farmland or house. 3.- S!&.lin# de i#n !nd !&.le i/e deter&in!tion ,tratified random sampling was applied to carry out the research on the basis of socio economic condition of users. ,ampling intensity of &'6 from the total households was chosen. The users for household survey were selected after close consultation with )!O, staff and 7 of the !. !or the size of the sample proportional samples were chosen from the people of each wealth classes. The "ser #roups ("#* had already differentiated HH into different wealth classes and that wealth ran/ing was used as a basis for economic differentiation among the users. The number of HH in each class as follows$


That !"# had &819 HHs. Among them 80: HHs were rich, :0' HHs were medium, 1;0 HHs were poor. The sample size of each wealth class was as described in the following table 0. T!0le3.3 Different 'e!lth cl! cl! S.2. !nd e1 'i e. )e!lth cl! Tot!l HH Percent 3 S!&.le HH 89 >8 80 &88 Percent 3 11.11 1?.> 0;.&? &'' 2o. of S!&.le HH 04 Se1 <ale !emale 1' &9 80 &0 1> ? &'? 1? .o.ul!tion !nd !&.le .o.ul!tion fro& e!ch 'e!lth

& =ich 80: 0 <iddle :0' 1 @oor 1;0 8 Total &819 ,ource, !ield ,urvey 0'&& 3.5 D!t! collection


@rimary and secondary data were collected but major emphasis was given to primary data collection. 3.5.1 Pri&!r4 d!t! The primary data were collected through interview and observation. ,emi4 structured interviews with the respondents. The followed methods were e-pected to generate precise, orderly and in depth information allowing a logical analysis. 6ue tionn!ire ur7e4% ,tructured 3uestionnaire was developed and !"# members were interviewed using these 3uestions along with the household survey. This method was also useful in getting information on the ways to enhance %#As, assess forest product distribution system and forest management practices. Household survey of gathered from household survey. $ocu #rou. di cu ion$ ,everal meetings and discussions were held with several committee members, /ey informants, %#A group and some active general members, ethnic groups, women of !"# at different stages of the research process. !ocus group discussion were conducted to !"# members were done in order to get information on population, economic status, education level, etc was


discuss the research issues and to gather information the different %#As, its potentials and constraints in implementing different %#A. 8e49infor&!nt ur7e4% Aey informant survey was conducted to )istrict !orest Officer, "# president, and other person who is directly involved in community forestry. Direct O0 er7!tion% The direct observation of %#As, forest condition, forest product distribution system, community development activities etc. was done during the field survey. 3.5." Second!r4 d!t!$ ,econdary data re3uired for this research wor/ were collected from various sources such as approved =eports of !"#s, minutings, published and unpublished reports, research papers, )epartment of !orest OfficeBs publication, websites etc. 3.: D!t! !n!l4 i $ A major part of the results and findings was collected from secondary source of information. Cualitative and 3uantitative data collected from various sources were processed and analyzed to prove the defined objectives. Cuantitative data were analyzed by using simple statistical tools i.e. mean, bar diagram ratioD pie charts etc. and 3ualitative data were presented in descriptive ways so that the basic findings of the research would be well interpreted and justified.

3.; Method for C!lcul!tin# Hou ehold Inco&e 3.;.1 Co&.onent of Hou ehold Inco&e As stated in the literature review part, household income is the sum of income received from the farm, off4farm and non4farm activities of a single household, generally considered for a period of one year. !or convenience in data collection and analysis, in this study household income and its fractional income is defined somewhat differently as follows$ Household %ncome E f (Agriculture %ncome F .ivestoc/ %ncome F %ncome F Other !orest %ncome F Non4farm %ncome* ommunity !orest


2here, Agriculture income composed of income from cereal crops, horticulture crops, vegetables and other cash crops received from all lands cultivated by a household, considered for a period of one single year. .ivestoc/ income composed of income received from the sell of livestoc/, their products li/e mil/, manure, labour, etc., value of consumed products by a household during one year period. .ivestoc/ considered in this study are buffalos, cattle, goats and pigs reared by the household. ommunity !orest %ncome includes the monetary value of the forest products consumed from the community forests and the income received from the sell of the forest products by the user household during one year period. !orest products considered in this study are timber, fuel wood, tree fodder, ground grass, leaf litterGforage materials. Non farm income in this study comprise of all the income other than agriculture income, ! income, other forest income and livestoc/ income that a household receives in one year period. Non4farm income activities include government service, non4 government service, private service, foreign employment, business, wage labour, contract wor/s, rent from house etc. 3.;." Method for <!luin# Product <ost of the agriculture products are mar/etable and therefore, they have been assigned the local mar/et retail price to calculate income from such products. !ruits and vegetable price is not fi-ing so calculated on the basic of local mar/et price. The prices of these products were as follows$ =ice E N=s &1>'G&''/g (per 3uintal* 2heat E N=s 0&?'G&''/g, <aize E N=s &;>'G&''/g, %ncome from domestic animals and mil/ production highly varies on the basis of their breeds, physical sizes and so on. Therefore, income from the animals was collected from the informants.


%ncase of forest products, it was easy to compute income from timber wood, fuel4 wood, fodder and bedding materials, because these are saleable commodities. The volume of wood4mass in each of these products ma/es a difference in its price. !or the purpose of this research, the average mar/et price of average size of each was ta/en. ,uch prices were, Timber wood E N=s 8>'(per cft* !uel4wood E N=s &>' (per 3uintal* !odderG+etting materials E N=s &' (per +hari*