Non-timber forest product utilization under community forest management in northern Thailand

Figures & data

Figure 1. Map of study area, Ban Mae Chiang Rai Lum Community Forest in northern Thailand.

Figure 2. Conceptual framework links between utilization of NTFPs and CFM in community forest for livelihood and biodiversity conservation.

Table 1. Components CFM effectiveness.

CFM	Definition
People’s participation	Involvement in decision making, attending meeting, determining regulations, and forest development planning activities Participation in activities: forest plantation and rehabilitation, forest patrols, forest fires prevention, forest surveys and alignment, building check dams, and forest culture and tradition Receiving environmental, social, and economic benefits from the community forest Following up on performance, presenting problems and obstacles, and finding solutions to CFM
Community forest regulations	Level of knowledge regarding community forest regulations, and opinions as to (a) perception of CFM, (b) the appropriateness and efficiency of regulation enforcement, and (c) level of compliance with community forest regulations
Perception and understanding	Level of knowledge about CFM, NTFP utilization, and sustainable forest management
Benefit sharing	Level of satisfaction from sharing the benefits of the community forest.

CFM: community forest management; NTFP: non-timber forest product.

Table 2. Variable descriptions and expected socio-economic factors’ impact on NTFP income and participation in CFM.

Variables	Description and measurement	Expected sign
		NTFP income	Participation
Dependent variables
NTFP income	The total income of a household from harvesting NTFPs (US $)
Participation	The level of engagement in community forest management: 1 = very low, 2 = low, 3 = moderate, 4 = high, and 5 = very high
Independent variables
Gender	The sex of respondents: 1 if female, and otherwise 0	−	+
Age	The age of respondents: year	+	−
Marital status	The marital status of respondents: 1 = single, 2 = married, 3 = divorced, and 4 = widow	+	+
Household status	The role of respondents in family: 1 if head, and representative 0	−	+
Educational levels	The education level of respondents: 1 = uneducated, 2 = elementary school, 3 = secondary school, 4 = bachelor’s degree, and 5 = postgraduate	−	+
Number of household members	The number of members in a household: 1 if household size > 3 persons, and otherwise 0	+	+
Main occupation	The primary occupation of respondents: 1 = farmer, 2 = laborer, 3 = merchant, 4 = government official/company employee, and 5 = unemployed	+	+
Household income	The total income of a household: 1 if low income < US $2,806.45 (the second quartile), and otherwise 0	+	+
Land ownership	The land tenure of a household: 1 if land ownership, and otherwise 0	−	−
Rented land	The rented land of a household: 1 if rented land, and otherwise 0	+	+

NTFPs: non-timber forest products; US $: United States Dollar.

Table

Likert scale	Interval	Interpretation
5	4.21–5.00	Very High
4	3.41–4.20	High
3	2.61–3.40	Moderate
2	1.81–2.60	Low
1	1.00–1.80	Very Low

Table 3. Current status of plant species in the community forest.

Status	Species	Families	Habit	Number of stems
				Tree	Sapling	Seedling	Total
Least Concern (LC)	Azadirachta indica	MELIACEAE	T	30	18	5	53
	Bauhinia glauca	FABACEAE	C	48	15	67	130
	Casearia grewiifolia	SALICACEAE	T	3	4	–	7
	Cassia fistula	FABACEAE	T	3	–	–	3
	Chukrasia tabularis^a	FABACEAE	T	3	3	207	213
	Cratoxylum cochinchinense	HYPERICACEAE	T	4	9	21	34
	Cratoxylum formosum	HYPERICACEAE	T	16	65	386	467
	Cyperus rotundus	CYPERACEAE	H	–	–	197	197
	Dalbergia cana	FABACEAE	T	1	–	–	1
	Globba winitii^a	ZINGIBERACEAE	H	–	–	66	66
	Holarrhena pubescens	APOCYNACEAE	S/T	–	6	–	6
	Irvingia malayana	IRVINGIACEAE	T	30	3	20	53
	Markhamia stipulata	BIGNONIACEAE	T	11	3	15	29
	Oxystelma esculentum	APOCYNACEAE	C	–	–	2	2
	Phyllodium pulchellum	FABACEAE	S	–	12	10	22
	Shorea siamensis	DIPTEROCARPACEAE	T	390	46	79	515
	Sindora siamensis	FABACEAE	T	263	50	49	362
	Siphonodon celastrineus	CELASTRACEAE	T	5	–	–	5
	Vitex pinnata	LAMIACEAE	T	4	1	5	10
	Wendlandia tinctoria	RUBIACEAE	ST	18	10	18	46
Near Threatened (NT)	Dalbergia cultrata^a	FABACEAE	T	2	1	3	6
	Dipterocarpus obtusifolius^a	DIPTEROCARPACEAE	T	72	14	26	112
	Dipterocarpus tuberculatus^a	DIPTEROCARPACEAE	T	92	20	30	142
	Shorea obtusa^a	DIPTEROCARPACEAE	T	420	107	161	688
Vulnerable (VU)	Cycas siamensi^a	CYCADACEAE	S	–	488	116	604
Endangered (EN)	Dalbergia oliveri	FABACEAE	T	1	3	5	9

C: climber; H: herb; S: shrub; ST: shrubby tree; T: tree.

^aPopulation trend decreasing.

Figure 3. Socio-economics of sampled households.

Table 4. Total net NTFP income return from Ban Mae Chiang Rai Lum Community Forest in 2018.

NTFPs	Number of households engaged	Economic value of NTFPs (US $)				Relative NTFP income (%)
		Income	Costs		Net returns
			Opportunity	Transportation
1) Foods
Edible plants	34	2,154.19	740.32	263.23	1,150.65	3.18
Wild fruits	71	9,773.71	3,630.48	735.16	5,408.06	14.93
Mushrooms	105	34,306.61	5,802.39	1,889.03	26,615.19	73.47
Honey and insects	15	1,225.81	408.87	90.65	726.29	2.00
Small animals	57	3,700.48	1,172.18	341.77	2,186.53	6.04
2) Medicinal plants	7	32.26	13.31	9.03	9.92	0.03
3) Fuelwood	5	170.94	33.87	13.71	123.35	0.34
4) Fibers	1	9.68	14.52	–	−4.84	–
5) Extractives	–	–	–	–	–	–
Total	109	51,373.68	11,815.94	3,342.58	36,215.15	100

NTFPs: non-timber forest products; US $= United States Dollar. US $1 = 31 baht (Bank of Thailand as of 31 January, 2018).

Table 5. Mean comparison between NTFP income and household income.

Income quartile (poor to rich)	Number of households	Income range (US $)	Mean household income (US $)	Mean NTFP income (US $)	Relative NTFP income (%)	Gini coefficient (%)
Q1	40	348.39–1,612.90	1,161.40	85.23	7.34	63.33
Q2	40	1,612.90–2,806.45	2,132.74	264.01	12.38	69.82
Q3	39	2,806.45–4,145.16	3,463.27	307.93	8.89	71.78
Q4	40	4,145.16–46,212.90	7,950.65	255.91	3.37	69.01

Q: quartile; US $: United States Dollar; NTFP: non-timber forest product.

Table 6. Effectiveness of CFM and level of participation.

CFM	Mean	SD	Level
People’s participation	3.55	0.72	High
Community forest regulations	4.40	0.39	Very high
Perception and understanding	4.75	0.29	Very high
Benefit sharing	4.61	0.47	Very high
Total	3.92	0.52	High
People’s participation	Mean	SD	Level
Decision-making	3.35	0.91	Moderate
Forest activities	3.76	0.74	High
Co-benefits	3.82	0.82	High
Monitoring and evaluation	3.03	0.92	Moderate
Total	3.55	0.72	High

CFM: community forest management; SD: standard deviation.

Table 7. Correlations (Spearman) between NTFP income and CFM (n = 159).

CFM	Correlation (r)	p-Value
People’s participation	0.522	0.000***
Community forest regulations	0.269	0.000***
Perception and understanding	−0.094	0.234
Benefit sharing	0.279	0.000***
Total	0.524	0.000***

CFM: community forest management. ***p < 0.001.

Table 8. Multiple linear regression for variables predicting NTFP income (n = 109).

Predictors	B coefficients	Std. error	t-Value	p-Value
(Intercept)	2.386	0.069	34.116	0.000***
Laborer	−0.346	0.171	−2.029	0.045*
Merchant	−0.780	0.291	−2.677	0.008**
Low income	−0.220	0.095	−2.315	0.022*
R^2	0.118
Adjusted R^2	0.092
Significance level	0.004**

B: beta; Std: standard. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Table 9. Multiple linear regression for variables predicting participation in CFM (n = 159).

Predictors	B coefficients	Std. error	t-Value	p-Value
(Intercept)	3.608	0.175	20.593	0.000***
Single	−0.623	0.233	−2.668	0.008**
Household head	−0.285	0.114	−2.494	0.013*
Bachelor degree	−1.010	0.355	−2.845	0.005**
Low income	−0.293	0.109	−2.677	0.008**
Land ownership	0.375	0.163	2.304	0.022*
R^2	0.159
Adjusted R^2	0.131
Significance level	0.000***

B: beta; Std: standard. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Table

Families	Genera	Species	Number of species providing NTFPs
			Foods	Medicines	Fuelwoods	Fibers	Extractives
ACANTHACEAE	2	2		2
AMARYLLIDACEAE	1	1		1
ANACARDIACEAE	6	7	4	5	3		3
ANNONACEAE	2	6	2	3
APOCYNACEAE	9	9	5	7		2	1
ARACEAE	3	4	2	3
ARECACEAE	1	1
ARISTOLOCHIACEAE	1	1
ASTERACEAE	2	3		2
BIGNONIACEAE	4	4	3	3
BURSERACEAE	2	2	2	2			2
CALOPHYLLACEAE	1	1	1	1			1
CELASTRACEAE	2	2	2	2
CHRYSOBALANACEAE	1	1	1	1	1		1
COMBRETACEAE	1	5	2	5			3
COMMELINACEAE	2	2	2	2
CONNARACEAE	2	2		2	1
CONVOLVULACEAE	1	1		1
CORNACEAE	1	1	1	1
CYCADACEAE	1	1	1	1
CYPERACEAE	1	2		2		1
DILLENIACEAE	1	1	1	1
DIOSCOREACEAE	1	2	1	1
DIPTEROCARPACEAE	2	4	1	4	3		4
EBENACEAE	1	4	3	4		1	4
ELAEOCARPACEAE	1	1		1
EUPHORBIACEAE	4	5	2	5	2		1
FAGACEAE	19	34	11	25	8	3	4
HYPERICACEAE	1	2	1	1	2		2
IRVINGIACEAE	1	1	1	1	1
LABITAE	1	1
LAMIACEAE	2	6	3	6
LAURACEAE	2	2	1	2	1		1
LECYTHIDACEAE	1	1	1	1
LOGANIACEAE	1	1		1
LYGODIACEAE	1	1	1	1		1
LYTHRACEAE	1	4		3	1
MALVACEAE	7	8	2	6	1	4
MELASTOMATACEAE	1	1	1	1			1
MELIACEAE	4	4	4	4			1
MORACEAE	2	2	2	2	1
MYRTACEAE	2	2	1	2	1
OCHNACEAE	1	1		1
OPILIACEAE	1	1	1	1
ORCHIDACEAE	1	1
PARKERIACEAE	1	1
PASSIFLORACEAE	1	1	1
PHYLLANTHACEAE	6	11	6	10	3		4
POACEAE	1	1	1	1
RHAMNACEAE	1	1	1	1
RUBIACEAE	11	15	6	13	2		2
RUTACEAE	3	3	1	3
SALICACEAE	2	3	2	3			1
SAPINDACEAE	3	3	3	2	1
SAPOTACEAE	1	1
SELAGINELLACEAE	1	1
SIMAROUBACEAE	1	1		1			1
SMILACACEAE	1	1
STEMONACEAE	1	1		1
STERCULIACEAE	1	1		1
ULMACEAE	1	1		1
ZINGIBERACEAE	3	3	2	3
Total	144	197	89	160	32	12	37