|
|
|
Journal
of Forest and Livelihood Vol. 3 (1)
July 2003
|
This
issue of the journal was the joint product
of ForestAction Nepal and the Overseas Development
Institute (ODI) of the UK. There are seven
research-based articles providing critical
insights into the processes, impacts and
challenges of community forestry in Nepal.
The papers in this issue are expected to
stimulate reflection amongst the readers
about the lessons to be learned from the
community forestry programme of Nepal for
their global application. Of particular
interest, it has been concluded that community
forestry can no longer be seen as simply
meeting the dual objectives of conservation
and poverty alleviation, but that it may
also have a much more important role in
empowering local people to take action on
issues beyond forest management. |
| Contents and Abstracts |
 |
Community
Forest Management in the Middle Hills
of Nepal: The Changing Context
-Oliver Springate-Baginski,
Om Prakash Dev, Nagendra Prasad Yadav
and John Soussan |
| |
Abstract:
This paper outlines the policy context
and resource base for community forestry
in Nepal. Drawing on a study of 11
Forest User Groups (FUGs) in the Middle
hills region, the paper examines the
process of FUG formation and post-formation
support. The implementation process
of community forestry demands rapid
institutional change at Department
of Forests (DoF) and village level,
and changes in working relationships
between these levels. The DoF’s
main responsibilities in the Middle
hills are changing from the traditional
role of forest policing and protection,
and moving towards FUG facilitation.
However, the limited capacity of the
DoF has become the key constraint
to implementation of community forestry,
and finding a solution may involve
re-organizing the DoF support role.
As new priorities emerge in FUGs (relating
to community development for instance)
involving multiple support agencies
is becoming increasingly necessary.
|
|
Institutional
Development of Forest User Groups in
Nepal: Processes and indicators
-Oliver Springate-Baginski,
Nagendra Yadav, Om Prakash Dev and John
Soussan
|
| |
Abstract:This
paper describes an approach to developing
and using process indicators of the
institutional development of Forest
User Groups (FUGs) in Nepal. Assessments
of FUGs were carried out with forest
users, on the basis of indicators
identified by the users themselves.
The approach is helpful in distinguishing
patterns of development in the institutional
diversity of FUGs, and highlighting
support they require. Post-formation
support to FUGs is perhaps the most
pressing issue of community forestry.
So far, it has tended to be oriented
to technical forestry and yield-regulation.
If community forestry is to genuinely
reflect local people’s priorities
then there is a need to move towards
a more holistic and dynamic approach:
including supporting regular self-assessment
of FUGs’ changing needs, specific
support in conflict management, easier
amendment of forest management plans,
and ‘entrepreneurial’
support. |
|
Forest
Management and Utilisation Under Community
Forestry
-Nagendra
Prasad Yadav, Om Prakash Dev, Oliver
Springate-Baginski and John Soussan
|
| |
Abstract:
This paper examines the impact of
community forestry on forest resources,
based on a study of 11 Forest User
Groups (FUGs) in Nepal over three
years. The findings confirm that the
impact on forest resources has been
very positive. Prior to the formation
of FUGs, forest resources at almost
75% of study sites were deteriorating,
and now all are improving to a greater
or lesser extent. However, there is
a great complexity of situations on
the ground and various weaknesses
in the process which need to be addressed,
especially forest boundary conflicts,
inequity within FUGs due to low participation
of poorer households in decision-making,
and the prevalence of ‘passive’
forest management. |
|
Hamlet-Based
Micro-Level Action Planning: A Tool
for Improving FUGs' Planning, Decision-Making
and Implementation
-Om Prakash
Dev, Oliver Springate-Baginski, Nagendra
Prasad Yadav and John Soussan |
| |
Abstract:
Forest User Groups (FUGs) in Nepal
have become established as permanent
grassroots local institutions. The
most dynamic FUGs illustrate the remarkable
achievements that are possible: beyond
successfully protecting and managing
their forest resources they are also
assuming a co-ordinating role for
wider community development. However
many are constrained by inadequate
institutional processes, compounded
by weak and poorly coordinated support
from external agencies. One way to
address these constraints has been
developed: a micro-level action planning
process, which has been piloted across
11 FUGs. This involves self-assessment
by FUGs on the basis of process indicators,
decision-making through hamlet-level
discussion, and improved participation
of marginalized groups in decision-making,
and has proved to be an effective
basis for targeted demand-led support. |
|
Impacts of Community Forestry
on Livelihoods in the Middle Hills of
Nepal
Om Prakash
Dev, Nagendra Prasad Yadav, Oliver Springate-Baginski
and John Soussan |
| |
Abstract:
This paper attempts to assess
the livelihood impacts of community
forestry based on Forest User Groups
(FUGs) in the Middle hills of Nepal,
using data from the Koshi hills region
in the East. The general finding is
that impacts are diverse both within
and between FUGs, but have been generally
positive, in terms of improved levels
and security of forest product and
benefit flows, various household income-generating
opportunities, support for community
infrastructure and development activities,
and improved ‘social capital’
for collective planning and action.
Nevertheless, impacts to date are
below their potential, and the needs
of rural households require more investigation
to determine what further opportunities
exist and how policy and extension
agencies may offer specific needs-oriented
support. |
|
Why aren’t Poor People
Benefiting More from Community Forestry?
-Yam B. Malla,
Hari R. Neupane and Peter J. Branney |
| |
Abstract:
This paper summarizes the findings
of a socio-economic baseline study
undertaken amongst four Forest User
Groups (FUGs) in Nepal focusing on
levels of participation, understanding
of, and benefit from, community forestry
activities. Poorer households were
found to benefit significantly less
than wealthier households, and in
some cases may even be directly disadvantaged
by the advent of community forestry
in their villages. A major cause of
this inequity is that FUG committees
are dominated by wealthier households.
In addition, awareness levels of a
range of community forestry and FUG
institutional issues is low, particularly
amongst the poorest groups. Forests
are being managed below their productive
potential and only a limited proportion
of members’ forest product needs
come from community forests. |
|
Economics, Poverty and Transparency:
Measuring Equity in Forest User Groups
-Michael Richards,
Maksha Maharjan and Keshav Kanel |
| |
Abstract:
This study aimed to develop an
economic methodology, usable by Forest
User Groups (FUGs), for increasing
equity transparency in community forestry
in Nepal. Difficulties in developing
a truly participatory approach led
to a switch from the use of small
key informant groups to the use of
a household survey. Although more
replicable, cost-effective and reliable
for economic data, this reduced FUG
ownership and empowerment. A main
indicator for inequity was labor collection
time: the return per labor day rose
with the wealth group, reflecting
shorter distances to collect forest
products and more on-farm tree resources
among the wealthier households. It
is suggested that a suitable equity
indicator to act as a proxy for the
more complex economic indicators,
and which could be more easily collected
in a participatory way, is the time
needed (average hours per day) to
collect a bundle of subsistence forest
products per unit of household demand
(a composite of livestock ownership
and household size). A gender-based
equity indicator would be the number
of female hours per day. Livestock
ownership and household size should
be a sufficient proxy for use levels. |
|
|
|
|
|
