Under Threat
Following the pull out by major donor Denmark and review by British Aid Agency DFID, the community forestry users groups - the only remaining elected and accountable institution at the grass root level – are now facing dissolution. Although western democratic donor countries like Denmark and Britain took decisions to press the King to resume the democratic process, the total pull out from the community forestry program by DANIDA and the new policy adopted by the DFID could ultimately halt the process of democratization at the grass root benefiting only those who always profess the centralization of power and autocratic forms of government at the center. Whatever the arguments Nepal's friendly western democratic donor countries put forward to justify their decisions, poor and rural people of Nepal will have to bear the brunt of the consequences of suspension of the support to the community forestry program
By KESHAB POUDEL
After days of discussions and debates, the local population of Galyang Village Development Committee of Palpa district, 150 kilometers west of Pokhara, chose a new leadership for their Forest User Group Committee (FUGC). Although the total number of the assembly of user group is about 200 households, all people including women and Dalits participated in the process of choosing its executive committee.
Following the composition of new FUGC, there were bursts of jubilations as well as appreciations from all sides unaware of the fact that one of the key supporters of the program has already pulled out from the program and the District Forest Office is already in financial difficulties.
After the pull out by Danish government from the program, many district forest offices like Palpa are in financial trouble as now is the time when the last quarterly budget of the ongoing fiscal year is released. From buying seedlings to providing trainings, the district forest offices need the money to pay to CFUG members.
“The sudden and unexpected pull out by DANIDA is a major set back to the country’s community forestry program – which has received world wide fame,” said a senior official at the Ministry of Forest on condition of anonymity. "We are yet to recover from the shock.”
Another major donor DFID of Britain, too, has reviewed its assistance towards the community forestry projects. The DFID has decided to channel all funds "directly to local partners, including civil society organizations as well as district forest and soil conservation offices" according to Helen Wedgwood, the Rural Livelihoods Adviser at DFID Nepal.
Stalled Grass Root Democracy
At a time when the process of democratic elections of local bodies and parliament remains uncertain, users groups - who are still keeping alive the democratic institutions and democratic process at the lowest level or grass root level – may now have to suffer the similar fate. In the past they had been able to work despite annoying threats from the Maoists and often interventionist approach from the center because donor agencies like DANIDA had always backed them.
By participating in trainings and workshops in different parts of the country, the members of FUG, too, used to share their views and find out ways to cope with the conflict. This was one of the major benefits from the Danish assistance.
“They left us alone when we desperately need their moral and other forms of support to sustain the Forest User Groups,” said a member of Forest Users Group. “We have got resources on our own but we cannot sell it right now.”
According to the Community Forestry Division of Department of Forest, there are altogether 13791 Forest User Groups (FUGs) covering 11, 39, 233 hectares Community Forestry (CF) areas with the involvement of 15,75,512 households. It covers more than 1.1 million hectares of forestland. Among the total users’ group formed - about 700 or 5 percents are women CFUG – one that are entirely composed of women members. The users' groups are enriched with characteristics like decentralized decision making process, social inclusion, use of indigenous knowledge, community oriented legislation, changing role of forestry staffs, training and study tours.
From the very beginning, the community forestry’s decision-making process begins with adopting the statute and community forest operation plan, which is based on the user’s need and resource availability. With the discussions and debate among the user groups, the rules and regulations are finalized by their assembly consensus of majority of the users.
Every major decision including harvesting time for the forest products, mechanism for the product distribution, penalty for violating rules and regulations, protection systems, pricing of the forest products, and future activities in the forest are thoroughly discussed and decided. According to the manual, once the assembly makes the decision, the authority is given to forest user group committee (FUGC) for its implementation.
"The decisions in CF are made in two forums i.e. general assembly forum and FUGC forum. The household is the most important decision making unit in many settings. At the community level inclusiveness of women, dalits and other elites are very important. As a general principle of community forestry both the FUG assembly and FUGC meeting should be held separately on a regular basis,” writes Dhananjaya Lamichhane, assistant research officer at the Department of Forest Research and Survey in his case study of Syangja District.
The experiences have shown that all members raise their views on either personal or common issue and take part in the discussion and decision making process.
DANIDA’s Natural Resources Management Project Covers 38 districts with 7,952 forest user groups involving 843, 528 households. The DFID’s Forestry and Livelihood Project covers 15 districts with 3559 user groups involving 399,091 households.
According to the general guideline of community forestry program, each user group needs to organize mass meeting twice to debate and discuss on the programs and other matters related to the community forestry. The user groups choose their executive committee through the elections and tenure of the official is two years.
Actually, FUGs become a place to learn the way of democratic exercise for the village level bodies. It has helped to build the capability of local leadership and encourage women, dalits and other population. It has been possible due to increased participation of forest user groups in decision-making process of forest management.
A study has shown that more than half of the Village Development Committee Chairmen, vice-chairmen and ward members were in one way or another the members of the FUGs.
Unfortunately, the recent decision of the donors from western democratic countries will finally stall the democratic institution building process as well as accountable system of governance at the grass root level. Interestingly, this decision was a part of efforts by the western democratic government to press the present government to initiate the democratic process.
Donors are not alone to blame for the present set back. From middle class elites of Nepalese civil society to ministers of present government, all are equally responsible for it. Some members of middle class elite reacted so strongly against the Royal action of February 1 that according to them giving any assistance to Nepal meant supporting the despotic regime. Actually, it was not fully correct. The programs like FUGs do not have to do anything with the political game at the central level. Despite the October 2002 actions and suspension of all formal democratic exercise, these groups of people continued their democratic practice including the process of changing the leadership through the elections.
Despite the casualty of some two dozen members in the conflict, the FUGs are able to retain their system very much alive. Their annual meetings are disturbed frequently but they hold them in appropriate time.
“Withdrawing all operation from many projects at once is going to disturb whole system carefully build over the long period of time,” said Amrit Lal Joshi, renowned expert of community forestry program.
With the sudden withdrawal by DANIDA and new policy announcement by DFID, the whole process of community forestry program has already shaken. The most affected section of this decision is the rural people who do not have to do anything with the donors' decision and change in the government.
“I was shocked and amazed when we received the letters regarding the decisions. It seems that the donors don’t have credible commitment, partnership and trust towards the poverty alleviation,” said Dr. Keshav Kanel, chief of Community Forestry Division. "Without prior consultations and discussions, DANIDA pulled out from a program directed towards poverty reduction and institutionalization of democratic process at the grass root level. DANIDA has completely pulled out from the programs and DFID’s new conditionalities make it difficult to use their funds.”
The DFID has decided to fund the community forestry program not through the government’s red book (annual budget allocation program) but directly to the community users groups. “DFID changed its old policy so we have to build the plans for new mechanisms. It is impossible to use the DFID’s money in this fiscal year,” said Kanel.
Effect On The Programs
Following the withdrawal from the projects by DANIDA, the most important programs like training for user groups, officials, seedling products and operational plans preparation will badly suffer.
“We have never realized that DANIDA will take such a major decision on such haste or at the end of current fiscal year. Had they pulled out from the project with prior notifications, we would definitely have searched alternative mechanism,” said Damodar Parajuli, chief of the Planning Division of Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation. “We know foreign assistance cannot last long and ultimately we have to become self sufficient to run our programs.”
More than half of forest user groups out of 13,791 formed in the last one decade are in the position of generating financial resources through selling of their products to market and community. But because of intensification of Maoist insurgency and instability, they are in a tight spot.
There are genuine human concerns behind all those supports and help. It is up to the donors to decide how to help and how to involve. The support to community forestry program is to help to democracy at the grass roots. When it was withdrawn, the support to grass root democracy will be affected.
“We are very much thankful them for their contribution in the areas of capacity building, institution building, empowerment of user groups,” said Dr. Kanel. "But this sudden decision could unravel their contributions and efforts of the last decade.”
Now the whole progress could be ruined. The donors have money and they have wisdom. Poor Nepalese are left with poverty. "The donors think that when democracy will sustain, they will come back. We fail to understand the wisdom behind this concept. When democracy becomes self-sustainable, all democratic countries will come to support us. This is as Orwellian tragedy,” said a forest expert.
Apathy Of Government And Urban Elites
The exaggerated propaganda has definitely affected the decision-making desks of our democratic donors at their headquarters. Urban elites representing various opposition groups and the ruling elite like vice chairman of Council of Ministers Dr. Tulsi Giri - who also holds the portfolio of Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation – played the role on their part to disrupt the assistance.
Some urban intellectuals and opposition political leaders openly demanded the withdrawal of all kinds of foreign aid till the restoration of democratic process in Nepal. These kinds of statements received worldwide publicity and changed the minds of the people of different democratic world. Ignorant about the Nepal’s reality and contribution of aid projects to support Nepal’s poor, parliamentarians from western democratic governments pressed their government to suspend the aid.
Although Dr Giri – one of the senior most politicians of the present politics - heads the ministry, he did not make any effort to pursue the cause of community forestry. Dr. Giri who has been out of the country for more than two decades living in the Indian IT city of Bangalore, did not find time to defend the community forestry.
Whoever comes to meet Dr. Giri – who was ambitious and brilliant politician of 1960s – starts his conversation from political matters. He reportedly told his colleagues in different ministries that his job is to defend the King on political ground and he is not here to defend the cause of the ministry and their programs.
Dr. Giri’s dislike towards the community forestry is understandable as it is a concept based on accountable political system.
From building of institutions to developing their mechanism, the donors have made enormous contribution to activate Nepal’s indigenous system of community user groups. Thanks to the introduction of direct elections, good governance and accountable management, rural population learnt the modern idea of democracy: for the people, by the people and of the people.
Actually, the community forestry program is focused on the forest management and mobilization of the resources. One of the important components of the CF is that it is a system based on democratic idles: of the people, by the people and to the people. Community forestry has changed the way forests are used to be managed in the country but it also introduced the new democratic institutions and culture in rural areas.
All these achievements made over the years are now under threat. It is Nepal’s friendly western donor countries who initiated this basic concept of grass root democracy and it is their responsibility again to rescue it from collapse. Suspension of aid and assistance do not make any difference to urban elites and rulers but it will affect the livelihood of poor Nepalese.
"DFID Is Committed To Continue Support Through The Most Effective Channels"
— Helen Wedgwood
Helen Wedgwood , the Rural Livelihoods Adviser at DFID Nepal shared the British organization's ongoing support and recent review regarding its assistance towards the community forestry program. Excerpts:
DFID views Community Forestry as an important way of helping poor people and have been supporting Nepal’s community forest movement for many years. Today around one third of Nepal’s population (8 million people) are members of more than 13,000 community forest user groups. These groups have worked together to improve the condition of their forests, provide essential inputs for farming and the home, and generate income for community development.
DFID believes the community forest program has the potential to build on its success and contribute further to poverty reduction, as described in Nepal’s 10th plan. Through even more active and inclusive management, user groups can ensure better access to forest products and benefits, and generate more income to support the livelihoods of their poorest members.
Currently we have a 10 year livelihoods and forest program up to 2010, covering almost half a million user group member households (including about 2.5 million people) in 15 districts in East, West and Mid-Western regions. We are committed to continue this support through the most effective channels to ensure services reach those who need them most. To this end we recently reviewed our program, and have decided to channel all funds directly to local partners, including civil society organizations as well as district forest and soil conservation offices.
