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

Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?
Discussions and debate are on-going in the constitutional assembly on the roles,
responsibilities and rights of local and indigenous communities (including property
rights over forest land). The current arrangement of only two types of property
rights (state property and private property) being applicable to natural resources
is being questioned. The demand of civil society organisations such as FECOFUN
for the recognition of community property rights is gaining increasing public
support.
At the time the original Master Plan was drawn up, an institutional reform took
place that greatly facilitated the implementation of community forestry: each
division in the Forest Department was made responsible for its own programme.
This meant that community forestry had a clear status, and responsibility for its
implementation was placed in the hands of the District Forest Offi cers (DFOs).
Thus offi cial decision-making (notably the approval of CFUG establishment and
their operational plans) was devolved to a local, relatively accountable, and
practical level. This coincided with a time of major political development in Nepal
– the demise of the one-party panchayat system in 1990, a strong demand for
democracy, and expectation of change. The concept of CFUGs (see section on
governance) was in keeping with this demand.
In theory, the development and implementation of policies follows a “policy cycle”,
along which clear points of possible contribution to the process can be identifi ed
(see box 10).
Box 10: The theoretical “policy cycle”
The development of policies may be seen to follow a circular pattern, made up of the
following stages.
• Issue identifi cation – where access to reliable, evidence-based information is crucial
• Assessment of policy options – where a range of possible policy responses are
considered, and where their implications should be thoroughly reviewed
• Policy formulation – the stage of drafting legislation and passing it through the
necessary discussion and consultation procedures to become law
• Policy implementation – the process in which a new policy is put into action, often
requiring in turn the drafting of supporting rules and regulations; here of course there
may be a risk of unintended consequences
• Policy evaluation – the stage at which the effects of a policy are assessed on the
ground; the results, showing issues that need to be addressed, are fed back into
further policy development .
Source: Adapted from Bird, 2009:4
In practice in Nepal, the process of policy development is rarely so clearly defi ned
or streamlined, and opportunities for contribution are often ad hoc, dependent
on being “at the right place at the right time”, and not always possible to plan in
advance. Furthermore, the space for project intervention is generally quite limited,
72