Rural Sociology of Village Tree-Planting Committee Membership Quotas and Women's Participation in Woodlot Management in Kenyan Community Forests: A Regression Discontinuity Analysis of Quota Thresholds
Description
Village tree-planting committees in Kenyan community forests operate under membership quotas that reserve a fixed share of seats for women, yet the sociological consequences of crossing those thresholds remain poorly theorised. The design is specified for a running variable defined as the proportion of women on the committee, with the threshold set at the mandated reservation share. Quota compliance generates two distinct mechanisms—descriptive representation and procedural voice—that operate at different distances from the threshold, and that a discontinuity design can separate them. Using the DHS Program indicator 'Family planning messages at community meeting or event' across fifteen African countries (2021–2025; N = 15; mean = 29.733; SD = 17.495; range 6.60 in Mali to 73.40 in Malawi), the paper illustrates the kind of cross-national variation in community-meeting exposure that motivates the design. The contribution is a transferable identification strategy for quota research in rural institutions, not an empirical estimate. The paper concludes that threshold-based designs can clarify when quotas change participation and when they merely change composition.
Notes
Files
article.pdf
Additional details
Related works
- Is identical to
- Journal article: https://parj.africa/ajis_ruraldev/article/view/rural-sociology-of-village-tree-planting-committee (URL)
References
- Agarwal, B. (2009). Gender and forest conservation: The impact of women's participation in community forest governance. Ecological Economics, 68(11), 2785–2799.
- Agarwal, B. (2010). Does women's proportional strength affect their participation? Governing local forests in South Asia. World Development, 38(1), 98–112.
- Agrawal, A., & Ostrom, E. (2001). Collective action, property rights, and decentralization in resource use in India and Nepal. Politics & Society, 29(4), 485–514.
- Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist's companion. Princeton University Press.
- Cameron, A. C., & Miller, D. L. (2015). A practitioner's guide to cluster-robust inference. Journal of Human Resources, 50(2), 317–372.
- Chattopadhyay, R., & Duflo, E. (2004). Women as policy makers: Evidence from a randomized policy experiment in India. Econometrica, 72(5), 1409–1443.
- Government of Kenya. (2005). The Forests Act, No. 7 of 2005. Government Printer.
- Hahn, J., Todd, P., & van der Klaauw, W. (2001). Identification and estimation of treatment effects with a regression-discontinuity design. Econometrica, 69(1), 201–209.
- Imbens, G. W., & Kalyanaraman, K. (2012). Optimal bandwidth choice for the regression discontinuity estimator. Review of Economic Studies, 79(3), 933–959.
- Imbens, G. W., & Lemieux, T. (2008). Regression discontinuity designs: A guide to practice. Journal of Econometrics, 142(2), 615–635.
- Imbens, G. W., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 5–86.
- Lee, D. S. (2008). Randomized experiments from non-random selection in U.S. House elections. Journal of Econometrics, 142(2), 675–697.
- Lee, D. S., & Lemieux, T. (2010). Regression discontinuity designs in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(2), 281–355.
- McCrary, J. (2008). Manipulation of the running variable in the regression discontinuity design: A density test. Journal of Econometrics, 142(2), 698–714.
- Meinzen-Dick, R., Kovarik, C., & Quisumbing, A. R. (2014). Gender and sustainability. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 39, 29–55.
- Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
- Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The concept of representation. University of California Press.
- Thistlethwaite, D. L., & Campbell, D. T. (1960). Regression-discontinuity analysis: An alternative to the ex post facto experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(6), 309–317.