Analyzing multi-temporal satellite imagery and stakeholders' perceptions to have an insight into how forest co-management is changing the protected area landscapes in Bangladesh

Forest protected area co-management, which is viewed as an effective forest conservation strategy in many parts of the world, got rooted in Bangladesh in 2004. Nevertheless, its success in maintaining healthy status of forest landscapes is subject to strong challenges in Bangladesh where anthropogenic pressure on forest resources is extremely high. In his study, satellite imageries of two randomly selected important PAs of the country - Lawachara National Park (LNP) and Teknaf Wildlife Sanctuary (TWS) - were analyzed and linked to people's perception in understanding the conservation dynamics in the co-managed PAs. While the overall rate of forest cover loss declined from 33.56% during 2004–2011 to 11.23% during 2011–2017, the net impact on individual PA was not so positive: forest cover declination rate increased in LNP but decreased in TWS. However, even though bushy area is on significant rise in LNP (4.72% during 2004–2011, 40.12% during 2011–2017), it showed a little falling trend in TWS (7.44% during 2004–2011, 6.61% during 2011–2017). While people engaged in co-management were more inclined to highlight the success of co-management activities (Odds ratio = 1.721), the forest officials were less likely to say so (Odds ratio = 0.758). All parties except the direct beneficiaries of co-management activities had the same perception that co-management did not significantly improve the forest cover conditions in the PAs. The study, a combination of science and the society, has come up with a succinct conclusion that common people have strong insights into the extent of impact of forest management policy, and thus, their opinion should be accounted for while formulating or implementing such policy. •The study identified the impacts of co-management on forest conservation.•Co-management did not significantly improve forest cover condition in the PAs.•Other than co-management beneficiaries, all were reluctant about its success in improving forest cover condition.•Common people had better instincts and justifications on how a certain policy might impact society.