Agroforestry is recognized as a sustainable land use practice. However, the uptake of such a promising land use practice is slow. Through this research, carried out in a Terai district of Nepal, we thoroughly examine what influences farmers’ choice of agroforestry adoption and what discourages the adoption. For this, a total of 288 households were surveyed using a structured questionnaire. Two agroforestry practices were compared with conventional agriculture with the help of the Multinomial Logistic Regression (MNL) model. The likelihood of adoption was found to be influenced by gender: the male-headed households were more likely to adopt the tree-based farming practice. Having a source of off-farm income was positively associated with the adoption decision of farmers. Area of farmland was found as the major constraint to agroforestry adoption for smallholder farmers. Some other variables that affected positively included livestock herd size, provision of extension service, home-to- forest distance, farmers’ group membership and awareness of farmers about environmental benefits of agroforestry. Irrigation was another adoption constraint that the study area farmers were faced with. The households with a means of transport and with a larger family (household) size were found to be reluctant regarding agroforestry adoption. A collective farming practice could be a strategy to engage the smallholder farmers in agroforestry.

Community forestry in Nepal is considered an exemplary forest management regime. However, the economics behind managing a community forest is not fully studied. This study examines whether the benefits generated from community forest management justify the contributions of forest users. The study is based on a survey of community forest users in Chitwan, Nepal. A household level benefit-cost analysis was performed to quantify and compare the costs and benefits from community forest management. Only direct benefits were included in the analysis. The study shows that older forest user groups derive more benefits to households compared to more recently established ones. The extent of timber harvesting also substantially influences the size of the household benefits. In addition, redistribution of benefits at the household level, in terms of income generating activities and payment for involvement in forest management activities, also enhances household benefits. Sensitivity analysis suggests that the current practice of community forest management enhances the welfare of rural households in this subsistence community. However, this finding is sensitive to assumptions regarding the opportunity cost of time. The study also found that the household costs of community forest management depend upon two factors-the area of community forest and the size of the forest area relative to the number of households.