Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?

Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?
different management regimes, it was found that the rate of conversion of
non-forest areas into forests was signifi cantly higher in the community managed
forests compared against government and private forests.
In addition to these demonstrable increases in forest density, data from the project’s
sample 116 CFUGs shows that whilst in year 2000, only a little more than half (68)
of the sampled CFUGs were actively managing their community forest, by 2008
this had risen to over 95% of them (113) (Chhetry, 2010).
“NSCFP has not been able to address high altitude forest management to the extent that
it could have done.”
Arun Sharma Paudel, Department of Forests; also Kumbha Raj Lama, Former DFO
Okhaldhunga
“Despite its strengths, the project has placed little focus on the linkage between forest and
climate change.”
Peter Branney, Project Adviser, LFP
“Attention is required in identifi cation, protection and management of biodiversity,
especially the endangered species. Community forestry has an important, but not well
recognised role in biodiversity conservation, this is a largely unfulfi lled role of community
forestry.”
Khil Bahadur Tamang, Forest Ranger. Ramechhap
Key issues for the future
• Despite the availability of sound technical methods to calculate sustainable
levels of timber harvesting, and the existence of data from most community
forests in the project area to allow such calculations, timber harvesting remains
far below optimal levels. This represents a waste of the resource – since
harvesting is necessary to optimise forest productivity - and a major loss of
CFUG revenue. Increasing timber harvesting from CFUGs and ensuring that
the benefi ts are distributed equitably remains a major challenge for the future.
• The work conducted by NSCFP on sustainable NTFP harvesting could usefully
be revived and disseminated in CFUGs currently conducting – or planning to
conduct – commercial NTFP operations. Further refi nement of such methods
could also be considered.
• Ideally, the boundaries of all newly created CFs should be digitalised, with
these digitalised maps forming part of OPs and being kept in a national
database. Similarly, a gradual digitalisation of all CF boundaries should be
conducted to ensure that they cannot be contested, and that national CF
records are accurate. This will be especially important in the case of future
carbon markets.
• In the event of payment for environmental services becoming a widely
implemented reality, there is huge potential to elaborate, test and introduce
simple methods for the participatory monitoring of forest biodiversity and
condition. Methods for community-based carbon assessment and monitoring
could also be widely tested and introduced.
• The challenges, opportunities and mechanisms for community forestry in
high altitude forests (where users are often seasonal and from a variety of
locations) are worth further investigation and support.
57