Skip to main content

Research, Policy and Practice

Table 1 Summary of the capacity of property right regimes found in three case study sites to achieve EES goals

From: How property rights influence equity, efficiency and sustainability of high-altitude rangeland management in Bhutan

EES goals/property rights

Case study site 1

Case study site 2

Case study site 3

Cheabling

Sheytemi

Sha Gogona

Pilot leasing component

Chamgang

Dominant farming system

Yak and cattle herding

Yak herding

Yak herding

Cattle farming

Yak herding

Property rights regime

Communal use rights

Private use rights (herders, absentee landlady)

Private use rights (local temple)

Mixed or hybrid type (pilot leasing programme)

Private use rights (herders, absentee landlords)

Equity

High

Members of Cheabling community have equal access to communal tsa-drog

Low to medium

A group of 10 herders rent private tsa-drog and manages it as a de facto communal

Members have equal access

Members pay rent

High

Community members have equal access to tsa-drog belonging to the local temple

Users pay rent

High

Each member household received a 2.5-Ha plot for improved pasture development

Low

Some herders have access to less private use rights tsa-drog compared to their counterparts

Efficiency

Low-medium

No management rights

Have community norms (Turkelboom, F., and T. Wangchuk. 2009) and rules such as entry-exit timing, appointment of community steward on a rotational basis, penalty system

Low-medium

No management rights

Need prior approval from the absentee landlord

Rest same as Cheabling

Low-medium

No management rights

Medium-high

Have management rights

Individual plots allotted to members

Boundary fencing

Have a group constitution and by-laws

Low-medium

No management rights

Sustainability

Low

No management rights

No restriction on the number of livestock one is allowed to graze

Indiscriminate lopping of fodder trees from state forest for supplementary fodder

Land degradation issues—landslides and flash floods

Low

Same as Cheabling

Low to medium

No management rights

Less grazing pressure as there are only three herders left (one herder quit in 2012)

Medium to high

Have management rights

Members developed improved pasture

Fodder conservation (silage making) expected to reduce lopping and free-ranging in state forest

Low to medium

No management rights

Less grazing pressure due to fewer number of herders (20 households)