Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?
Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?
Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Two</strong> <strong>decades</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>community</strong> <strong>forestry</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Nepal</strong>: <strong>What</strong> <strong>have</strong> <strong>we</strong> <strong>learned</strong>?<br />
• Demonstration <strong>of</strong> the multi-partnership approach through <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g NGOs <strong>in</strong><br />
<strong>community</strong> <strong>forestry</strong>; various important elements <strong>of</strong> this <strong>have</strong> been adapted by the<br />
M<strong>in</strong>istry <strong>of</strong> Forests and Soil Conservation<br />
• Development and practical demonstration <strong>of</strong> <strong>community</strong> forest <strong>in</strong>ventory procedures,<br />
subsequently adopted <strong>in</strong> government guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />
• Design and implementation <strong>of</strong> micro-projects outsourced to NGO service providers<br />
• Promotion <strong>of</strong> the concept <strong>of</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g disadvantaged girls to become active women<br />
development agents through scholarships for school education, vocational tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g,<br />
<strong>forestry</strong> education and short term tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g as Local Resource Persons<br />
• Collaboration with the Department <strong>of</strong> Forests and Community Forestry Supporter<br />
Network (COFSUN) for the accreditation <strong>of</strong> Local Resource Persons by the Vocational<br />
Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g Institute<br />
• Advocacy for susta<strong>in</strong>able forest management and generation <strong>of</strong> evidence <strong>of</strong> forest<br />
underutilisation through the analysis <strong>of</strong> forest <strong>in</strong>ventory data vis-a-vis timber harvest<strong>in</strong>g<br />
levels<br />
• Promotion <strong>of</strong> pro-poor approaches to forest-based enterprise development<br />
• Development <strong>of</strong> appropriate, “user-friendly” methodologies for <strong>we</strong>ll-be<strong>in</strong>g rank<strong>in</strong>g,<br />
governance coach<strong>in</strong>g, equity and poverty sensitive Livelihood Improvement<br />
Programme (LIP) - target<strong>in</strong>g households by <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g livelihoods needs and rights<br />
• Development and implementation <strong>of</strong> various methodologies support<strong>in</strong>g good forest<br />
governance, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g leasehold and <strong>community</strong> <strong>forestry</strong> <strong>in</strong>terface; Village Level<br />
Development Plann<strong>in</strong>g (VLDP)<br />
• Initiation and systematic cont<strong>in</strong>uation <strong>of</strong> photo-monitor<strong>in</strong>g to document visual<br />
landscape change<br />
• Longitud<strong>in</strong>al analysis <strong>of</strong> governance at CFUG level<br />
• Support to users’ federations through evidence-based conceptual <strong>in</strong>put, such as an<br />
analysis <strong>of</strong> the possible consequences <strong>of</strong> a government proposal on benefi t shar<strong>in</strong>g<br />
from <strong>community</strong> forests<br />
• Assessment <strong>of</strong> development space <strong>in</strong> confl ict and demonstration <strong>of</strong> the role <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>community</strong> <strong>forestry</strong> <strong>in</strong> promot<strong>in</strong>g local democracy and <strong>community</strong> based<br />
peace-build<strong>in</strong>g<br />
• Contribution to a comprehensive livelihood study, <strong>in</strong>itiatives support<strong>in</strong>g the<br />
democratisation <strong>of</strong> the <strong>forestry</strong> sector, and the forest sector strategy development<br />
process<br />
• Contribution to the curriculum development process for a Masters’ degree <strong>in</strong> Forestry<br />
and collaboration with <strong>Nepal</strong>’s Institute <strong>of</strong> Forestry <strong>in</strong> Human Resource Development<br />
<strong>in</strong> <strong>forestry</strong><br />
• Collaboration with <strong>in</strong>ternational research and academic <strong>in</strong>stitutions, such as Ed<strong>in</strong>burgh<br />
University, NCCR, CIFOR, RRI, and RECOFTC.<br />
“Current leadership at NSCFP has been very vocal when it comes to challeng<strong>in</strong>g policy,<br />
articulat<strong>in</strong>g ground reality based on own experiences, and establish<strong>in</strong>g l<strong>in</strong>kages with policy<br />
makers both at the donor and the government level.”<br />
Peter Branney, LFP<br />
Overall, the opportunities for <strong>in</strong>fl uenc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>community</strong> <strong>forestry</strong> policy makers are no<br />
longer the same as they <strong>we</strong>re t<strong>we</strong>nty years ago. There is a far greater expectation<br />
on the part <strong>of</strong> most stakeholders, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g donors, for a <strong>Nepal</strong>i-driven, multi-stakeholder<br />
process. This does not mean that the importance <strong>of</strong> donor-funded projects<br />
and programmes has dim<strong>in</strong>ished. To the contrary, there is still a huge need to<br />
77