Forests beyond timber: how non-timber forest products could reshape rural economies

Forests have long been valued mainly for one thing: timber. Construction and paper industries have drawn on that narrow view for decades, and in the process, according to a new editorial in Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, an enormous portfolio of forest resources has been pushed into the shadows. Fruits, nuts, medicinal plants, honey, latex, resins and ornamental foliage—collectively known as non-timber forest products, or NTFPs—have historically been dismissed as minor, secondary or non-wood goods. The editorial, published on 22 October 2026 and authored by MAM Anjaly Shanker, Payel Ghosh and Sandeep Singh Rana of Vellore Institute of Technology in India, argues that this undervaluation obscures resources that sustain livelihoods, food security and, increasingly, global markets.

The authors frame NTFPs as products harvested by human populations for use and trade across generations, providing food, medicine and material inputs to people living in and near forests, alongside income and employment. They point to growing interest in these resources over the past ten to twenty years, driven by three factors: their contribution to rural livelihoods and economic welfare, their role in sustainable forest management, and the rising perceived value of tropical forests as commercial NTFP harvesting expands. Because harvesting non-timber products is described as less ecologically invasive than timber extraction, the editorial suggests that commercial demand can increase the incentive to preserve standing forest rather than convert it to agricultural land or pasture—a framing that positions NTFPs as resources serving both livelihood security and conservation.

The evidence the authors cite spans continents. In a study of NTFP management in Ayubia National Park in Pakistan, more than half of village residents were involved in collecting forest products, most of them women, with the harvest contributing to food security and additional income from trading in nearby cities. In South Asia, Africa and the Amazon basin, the editorial notes, NTFPs play an integral role in food security and cultural identity and form a backbone of household finances. Global demand, meanwhile, is aligned with consumer pressure for organic, ethical and naturally sourced products, drawing interest from industries including cosmetics and plant-based oils.

Sustainable harvesting, the editorial argues, rests less on formal operational protocols than on long-guided traditional knowledge. Indigenous and rural communities use seasonal resource calendars, rotational collection and spiritual doctrines to prevent overexploitation. Low-impact techniques include selective hand-picking, careful tapping for resins and avoiding the over-harvesting of reproductive structures, with proper collection methods minimizing disturbance to soil layers and adjacent vegetation. Brazil nut harvesting in the Amazon basin illustrates the model: nuts are allowed to fall naturally to the ground, where local collectors gather them without distressing the wild trees, safeguarding the forest canopy and wildlife habitats while supplying a globally traded income source. Gum arabic, the sap collected from acacia trees, is another example—the parent tree is unaffected, and the gum finds its way into food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products.

The pattern extends across product types. Seasonal plucking of tendu leaves, used in traditional cigarettes, preserves the health of the parent tree while providing vital seasonal income for millions of indigenous harvesters, particularly women. Animal-derived products matter too: lac resin, the secretion of insects living on host trees, is processed into shellac for varnishes, polishes and food coatings, while in Central and West Africa bushmeat serves as a major source of protein and income. Shells and feathers collected for handicrafts and cultural practices support local artisans under regulated harvesting. One of the editorial’s most striking figures concerns mahua, the flowers of Madhuca longifolia, a common Indian NTFP projected to involve some 10 million tribal gatherers during the flowering period, generating seasonal household income of roughly 2,000 to 4,000 Indian rupees. Mahua seed oil, used in rural cooking and as a biodiesel feedstock, adds further economic value.

Yet long-term dependence on wild supplies creates vulnerabilities, and the editorial highlights domestication and cultivation as complements. In India’s Nilgiris Biosphere Reserve, producer collectives have established nurseries for honey plants, silk cotton and medicinal species by integrating traditional seed knowledge with modern cultivation practices. In Ghana, community-based domestication of Allanblackia trees has integrated the oilseed species into agroforestry systems, reducing reliance on wild harvesting while supplying raw material for food and cosmetic industries; farmer cooperatives cultivating the species there support more than 10,000 smallholder households. By incorporating forest products into agroforestry, the authors write, this strategy secures supply chains, protects wild ecosystems and boosts local economies.

The economic architecture of NTFPs, however, remains decentralized and poorly measured. Because trade flows mainly through localized markets, the total macroeconomic value of the sector stays underestimated, the editorial contends. At the household level, wild fruits, mushrooms, tubers and honey supplement diets with essential nutrients, while medicinal plants reduce dependence on costly pharmaceuticals. The authors cite work on shiitake mushrooms, rich in compounds such as lentinan, ergosterol, eritadenine and antioxidants, as underlining potential benefits for immunity and chronic disease risk among forest-dwelling communities—claims that reflect the cited study’s framing rather than new clinical trial evidence. Beyond food, forest-based sericulture silk, managed wildlife products and ornamental items diversify income pathways, and even unsold products save households money by substituting for purchases.

What makes the sector socially distinctive, the editorial argues, is its low barrier to entry. Collection is labor-intensive but requires no fertilizers, pesticides, machinery or much scientific knowledge, making it accessible to marginalized groups including women and landless laborers. The value chain is described as revolving largely around rural women, and women involved in household finances are reported to redistribute money toward nutrition, child welfare and community development. Supplementary NTFP income also acts as a buffer against climate irregularities, economic instability and crop failures, while secondary links in the supply chain—trade and processing—generate additional employment. The market itself, though, is described as imperfect and unplanned: middlemen buy at low values and pass on thin margins to harvesters, and remote geography limits access to broader markets, allowing local traders to capture the larger share of value.

The editorial closes with a set of remedies and warnings. Formalizing producer networks can guarantee gender inclusion, avoid exploitative intermediaries and secure fairer prices; the Nilgiris collective, for instance, created branded products such as soaps, baskets and food items, strengthening bargaining power and fixed prices. Basic processing—sorting, grading, drying—raises quality and returns, and a Central India study found economic advantages in selling processed goods such as oils and balms from small-scale units processing mahua flowers and chironji seeds. Reported figures from the cited literature suggest processing centers can reduce post-harvest losses by 25 percent and diversification into multiple product lines can strengthen household incomes by 20 to 30 percent. Against these gains stand serious pressures: over-collection, bark stripping and harvesting of immature products driven by market demand; cinnamon production in which clear-cutting and slash-and-burn techniques have contributed to deforestation; habitat loss from deforestation, agricultural expansion and urbanization; and climate shifts disrupting the seasonal cycles on which harvests depend. Governance emerges as a decisive factor—studies cited indicate that multi-stakeholder decision-making and community control support fair access and forest outcomes, and that in India, Gram Sabha-led governance has helped communities negotiate better terms for tendu leaf and mahua sales. The authors’ conclusion is that NTFPs are not peripheral supplements but strategic assets, and that adaptive community-based management, rural processing infrastructure, cold storage and better market information for indigenous collectors will be needed to realize that potential.

Subject of Research: Non-timber forest products, their sustainable harvesting, economic value and market challenges

Article Title: Editorial: Non-timber forest products: from sustainable harvest to market innovation

Article References: Shanker, M. A., Ghosh, P., & Rana, S. S. (2026). Editorial: Non-timber forest products: from sustainable harvest to market innovation. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 10, Article 1939299. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2026.1939299

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/fsufs.2026.1939299

Keywords: non-timber forest products, sustainable harvest, forest livelihoods, NTFP markets, agroforestry, value addition, indigenous communities, forest governance, Brazil nuts, mahua, women's income, biodiversity conservation