Transcript ADVANCES OF COMMUNITY FORESTRY IN NEPAL

FORESTRY GOVERNANCE AND CLIMATE
CHANGE IN THE CONTEXT OF
COMMUNITY FORESTRY IN NEPAL
Yuba Raj Bhusal
Krishna P. Acharya
Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation
Government of Nepal
22 October 2009
OUTLINE
1. Forestry in Nepal
2. Evolution of Forest Management
3. REDD and Community Forestry
4. Conclusion
1. Forestry in Nepal
•National forests accounts 39.6% (29+10.6 i.e., 5.8m. ha);
• Subsistence agro-based economy (livelihood of more than 66%);
•Heavily dependent on forests;
•Local communities have established user rights over the forests
since long time;
2. Evolution of Forest Management
•Forests as the main source
of state revenue,
•Forests given to individuals
during Rana regime (18461950);
•Nationalization Forests
(Private Forests Nationalization
Act, 1957);
6000
Area in '000 ha
•However, deforestation
continued- ‘Himalayan
degradation debate’ 1970s;
•Government alone not able
to control deforestation.
7000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
FRSO-1964
LRMP-1978
Forest
MPFS-1985
Assessment Year
Shrub
Total Area
NFI-1994
Evolution contd…
•Community based national policy and legal base framed in
1970s (National Forests Policy 1976, Forests Act amended in 1978: PF and
PPF);
•Institutions re-structured and re-oriented;
• Community forestry adopted, ‘traditional use rights’ as one of
the key hand over criteria;
•Community forestry in Nepal – a most successful example of
sustainable management of forests.
1955
2007
3. REDD and Community Forestry
•REDD as an emerging incentive;
•REDD implementation enhances Nepal’s
commitments to her international obligations;
• Nepal understands that- REDD brings additional
benefit and carbon as co-benefit;
• Issues of tenure/ownerships of the carbon;
•Benefit distribution (between central and state/local
governments, government and community,
inter/intra community, Indigenous peoples/ forest
dwellers and other poor households).
4. Conclusion
•Forestry sector governance reforms recognizing the
rights of the communities is a key to achieve
sustainable management of forests (SMF);
•Institutional restructuring and re-orientation are
important components;
•Recognition of ‘bundle of services’ is important than
a particular service of the forest resource (i.e.,
carbon) to secure rights of the communities;
•Clear understanding of the community and their
customary rights is vital to reduce potential conflicts;
•Multi-stakeholders involvement may address REDD
related issues.