Table 3. Summary results of the four indicators used to measure the efficiency of the conservation institution in the Annapurna Conservation Area. Conservation Area Management Committee members were asked to rate on a 5-point scale if the following things are better or worse now than they used to be 10 years ago: much better =5, somewhat better = 4, no change = 3, somewhat worse = 2, much worse = 1. (Source: authors’ interview data; n = 190)


Statement Much better Somewhat better No change Somewhat
worse
Much worse Mean ± SD
1. People can get permits to harvest natural resources easily 59.5% 21.6% 13.7% 5.3% - 4.35 ± 0.91
2. Ordinary people can influence conservation and development issues in the village 44.2% 48.4% 7.4% - - 4.37 ± 0.62
3. People have an adequate standard of living 35.8% 49.5% 13.7% 1.1% - 4.20 ± 0.71
4. Conservation efforts are effective 31.6% 58.9% 6.3% 3.2% - 4.19 ± 0.69