FORUM (Spotlight Weekly)

The Search For Clarity In Nepal's Forestry Policy

By Ronald Peter Nash

Every Nepali has an interest in the sustained management and conservation of this country's forest resources - be it for products such as fodder, fuel, timber, medicinal plants, or less directly for protection of water supplies, control of soil erosion or indeed for the pleasure which can be gained from the rich flora and fauna contained in the forests and which can make such a large contribution to leisure and tourism.

The UK and several other donors have been supporting the forest sector in Nepal for over 20 years. And the achievements have been impressive. Working on the basis of the Forest Sector Master Plan and Forest Act, rates of degradation particularly in the mid-hills, have been reduced and millions of citizens have taken over the responsibility of forest management. Previously naked hill sides have been restocked with green timberland. Today there are over 9,000 forest user groups, and the livelihoods of their many members have improved by reduced vulnerability, raised incomes and enhanced human and social capital, (an unfortunate term of jargon by which we mean community identity capability and purpose).

Nepal has been a leader in community forestry. Few countries can demonstrate such success. But despite the success in the hills challenges remain. The protectionist and passive forest management approach taken by many user groups have undoubtedly led to lost benefits. And there is a need to improve the voice of marginalised groups such as the poorest and women. Donors, too, must take some responsibility for shortcomings. Their district-by-district and, fragmented approach has been a burden to the Nepalese authorities in their efforts to achieve nation-wide implementation. And this compartmentalisation of small projects has meant that all of us have failed properly to learn from one another as lessons have been learned and mistakes made.

But it is in the Terai where improvements are desperately needed. Deforestation there continues unabated, and the Timber Corporation distorts the marketing system in the most perverse manner. The continued activities of this public body would appear to fly in the face of the Government's wider efforts at privatisation, rationalisation and reform. Many people think it needs scrapping.

The UK's Department for International Development recently agreed a ten-year programme to assist Nepal to develop a national forest agenda which will enable the potential benefits of all forest resources for poverty alleviation and economic growth to be realised. This is called the "Livelihoods and Forestry Programme". The name indicates the importance of forests and forest management systems for the livelihoods of the poor. It also underlines the need to consider forest policy and plans in the context of the diverse livelihoods that many Nepalese people live, particularly in the most remote areas.

The Livelihoods and Forestry Programme will extend support for community forestry to eleven hill districts, and pilot inclusive forest management processes in two or, hopefully, more Terai districts.

The programme is explicit in its objective of helping Nepal to set up a joint forest sector approach with other donors. We want, with others working in the field, to overcome some of those old problems of compartmentalisation.

There are other issues. The Forest Act and the more recent Local Self-Governance Act provide an important framework for forestry as well as decentralisation. However, these Acts and other recent directives and circulars from the Ministry are in some instances contradictory. Some of the recent policy changes reduce the freedom of forest users to market their products, and this has led to confusion and reduction of incentives. These changes are also increasing the workload of already overstretched District Forestry Office staff. The main point is that policies should ensure that the incentives for long-term forest management, as demonstrated by the success of community forestry, are sustained.

The Biodiversity Action Plan developed by the government with UNDP is a welcome step that recognises the richness of Nepal's biological diversity. Community forestry, through improving forestry management has made a contribution to increasing biodiversity. This is consistent with the consensus that active management of forests will increase biodiversity. But conservation programmes must avoid compromising the livelihoods of local populations, since without consideration of livelihoods conservation efforts will fail. Consistent with the Government's policies, biodiversity can thus be seen as a contribution to both poverty alleviation and decentralisation.