Community Based Forestry in Nepal: Status, Issues and Lessons Learned

Abstract

Community Based Forest Management (CBFM) is a system of managing forest by the participation of local community for the mutual benefit of forest and local people. However, the level of participation may be varied according to the modalities and tenure arrangements. Nepal has been implementing CBFM approach for the forest through differently named programs since 1976, with the formulation of National Forestry Plan, 1976. Recently, six different modalities of forest management are categorized as CBFM that covers about 2.3 million hectare forest that is 38.5% of total forest in the country, and involved more than 3.8 million households. This vast number of households benefited has also brought special attention on further development and expansion of community based forest management modalities in Nepal. Moreover, its piloting experience on CBFM, Nepal appears at the front position in implementing CBFM program in the international arena. To grab this achievement it has gone through many ups and downs. Behind its success stories it has faced many issues with lots of learning and experience. In this connection, this paper has tries to explore the current status of various CBFM modalities in Nepal retrospectively with the experience from more than 3 decades of policy formulation and implementation. Moreover, this paper also strives to illustrate the lessons learned, related issues and the recent initiatives on CBFM practice in Nepal, which may benefit the policy makers and practitioners interested in community based forestry. Moreover, this paper has highlighted that only one type of CBFM model is not enough to address the need of different category people of diverse locality, for which policy reforms and revision of relevant guidelines are crucial according to the changing context and lesson learns.

Mainstreaming community-based forest management in West Sumatra: Social forestry arguments, support, and implementation

“…Arguments, support, and implementation of CBFM in some countries Countries Arguments Support Implementation Vietnam to increase forest cover and alleviate poverty (Sunderlin & Ba, 2005;Moeliono et al, 2017) part of forest land allocation program in the form of: (1) village forest management and (2) forest management by groups of households and individuals Moeliono et al, 2017) contract-based allocation of forest land to households and individuals (Tan & Sikor, 2011; Philippines to abate forest degradation, ensure equitable access, and manage limited resources (Pulhin et al, 2007;Rebugio et al, 2010) part of national strategy for sustainable forest management with three systems, i.e. central government initiated program, local government initiated program, and traditional forest management (Pulhin et al, 2007;Suharjito, 2009;Rebugio et al, 2010;Hlaing et al, 2013) Contract-based program for central government initiative, co-management agreement for local government initiative, and self-initiated for traditional forest management (Rebugio et al, 2010;Hlaing et al, 2013) Nepal to address local livelihoods and abate forest degradation (Gurung et al, 2011;Uprety et al, 2012;Pandey & Paudyall, 2015) part of national programs in the form of community forestry (CF), leasehold forest (LHF), collaborative forest management (CFM), buffer zone community forestry (BZCF), protected forest (PF) and religious forest (RF) (Pathak, Yi, & Bohara, 2017) operational co-operation between government and forest user groups for CF and BZCF (Wakiyama, 2004), lease to propoor households for LHF (Pathak et al, 2017), collaboration with local people, local government and Department of forests for CFM (Bampton et al, 2007;Pathak et al, 2017), council formation for PF and forests around temples or other sacred religious places for RF (Pathak et al, 2017) Bangladesh to conserve protected area, abate deforestation, and improve socio-economic condition of local people (Chowdhury et al, 2009;...…”

Challenging the State: Devolutionary Tenure Transitions for Saving and Expanding Forests

“…Research in Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala has shown that forest loss is two or three times more in state forests (Blackman and Veit 2018). The demand for secure tenure is rising where communities have shown themselves to be effective forest developers and custodians at scale, as in Nepal (Pathak et al 2017). Demand is also surging where communities find they are unable to withstand state-supported allocation of their forests for large-scale oil palm plantations and mining in particular, such as documented by The World Bank in Zambia (Ali et al 2019) and by Chase Smith (2020) for Peru.…”

Understanding People−Forest Relationships: A Key Requirement for Appropriate Forest Governance in South Sumatra, Indonesia

“…Therefore, many countries have started to change their mindset and acknowledge the existence of communities in forest areas [13]. In recent decades, studies and policy models have been adopted which focus on the empowerment of forest peoples [14][15][16][17][18][19][20].…”