S WORLD BANK OPERATIONS EVALUATION DEPARTMENT FALL 2001 NUMBER 217 Community Forestry in 24574 Nepal AIthough Nepal is among the world's poorest countries, it is a global leader in engaging communities in forest protection and management. Nepal's community forestry program, more than two decades old, has helped regenerate substantial areas of degraded forests-but implementation has not been smooth. With no precedents, the country has had to learn through trial and error and find innovative solutions as challenges emerged. The experience of two Bank-supported projects has yielded valuable lessons for coun- tries that are initiating community participation in forest protection and management. These lessons are also pertinent to community- driven development, an approach rooted in community participation. Community forestry in Nepal illustrates theimportant to the livelihoods of the landless complex and irreversible changes that com- and the poorest, who depend on fuel- munity-driven development efforts may wood, fodder, and other non-timber prod- bring about in the social, economic, and ucts for their daily survival. Forests and political fabric of society, according to an shrubs occupy roughly 40 percent of assessment by the Operations Evaluation Nepal's land area, about 80 percent of Department (OED). Policymakers must which is either hills or mountains. Eco- carefully think through in advance the nuts nomically, the most important forest area and bolts of the decisionmaking process, in Nepal is in the Terai-a narrow, fertile, the specifics of benefit sharing among densely populated lowland along the bor- stakeholders, and the implementation strat- der with India. Traded timber from its egy. Once a process of community partici- continuous belts of forests provides a pation is initiated there is no turning back, major source of revenue for the state. By and mistakes can be difficult and expensive contrast, forests in the mid-hills region are to correct. Particular attention needs to be scattered, intermixed with settlements and given to two issues: those affecting the lives agricultural land, not easily accessible, and of the poorest and donor coordination. valued primarily for meeting the basic needs of the local population. Background In 1957, the government brought all of More than 90 percent of Nepal's people Nepal's forests under its direct control but live in rural areas. Forests are especially was unable to slow the rate of deforesta- 2 World Bank Operations Evaluation Department tion. Without the long-standing indigenous and traditional forestry program. It also increased awareness among hill systems of managing the country's forest resources, large communities of the need for forest protection and brought areas of forest were lost in the 1950s and 1960s. The fail- over 300,000 hectares of degraded hillside forest under the ure of state-controlled measures revived interest in partici- protection of more than 4,000 UGs. But achievements patory resource management. In 1978, the government under the major component-forest resource handed over limited areas of forestland to panchayats (now management-were mixed, because of an initial over- replaced by local elected governments), a practice that reliance on plantations as a means of forest restoration. In often excluded forest users who lived outside the pan- several cases, the emphasis on numerical targets short- chayat's administrative area. This led to adoption of the changed the quality of the UG formation process. Failure to concept of user group (UG) management in 1988. Nepal's implement the planned research component meant that cru- Master Plan for the forestry sector (1989) strongly advo- cial problems arising from field implementation could not cated community participation in forest management, and be addressed, and poor monitoring made it difficult to the 1993 Forest Act gave it the highest priority-also lend- judge how much of the regenerated forest cover could be ing forest UGs legal status as "autonomous and corporate attributed to the project. OED rated this project moder- institutions with perpetual succession," with the right to ately satisfactory. sell and acquire forest products. Mixed Results User Group Management Community management has slowed the rate of deforesta- Under current arrangements, the government owns the tion in Nepal, and 15 percent of the forestland is now pro- land, but UGs are entitled to 100 percent of the benefits tected by UGs. In the mid-hills (where large forest areas are flowing from forests under their protection, which gives under community protection), the rate has slowed to about them a vested interest in caring for those forests. Both pri- 0.2 percent a year. But in the Terai, forests are being mary users-those who regularly use the forest and have depleted at an annual rate of about 1.3 percent. locally recognized rights to do so-and secondary users- It has proved difficult to replicate the hill model in those who occasionally use the forest for a specific pur- other parts of the country, where conditions differ. Com- pose or product, but are not given full rights by the munity forestry expanded and took hold in the mid-hills primary users-are included in the UGs. Forest Depart- for several reasons. First, worldwide publicity about the ment staff working as extension agents do the work of reg- deteriorating condition of Nepal's forests spurred the istering and motivating UGs. Each group must produce government to try to control the rapid deforestation visi- and follow an operational plan that defines the manage- ble in the hill forests-forests it considered of little value ment area it agrees to protect, describes practices for forest for either commerce or public revenues. Local communi- management and harvesting, and identifies areas and ties also wanted to protect the forests to prevent recur- species to be planted. rence of the consequences of deforestation, such as landslides, erosion, and the like. That the forests were Bank-Supported Projects scattered made it easy to identify appropriate UGs, and The Bank's first forestry project in Nepal, approved in the international development community was willing to 1980, financed social forestry in the hills. Its Second provide budgetary resources to support participatory Forestry Project targeted the Terai with an ambitious oper- endeavors in rural areas. The government was already ation to foster community participation in managing the adopting the policy and legal reforms needed to support supply and demand for fuelwood, fodder, and other forest community forestry. products. It supported social forestry (tree plantings outside Circumstances are different in the Terai, where the gov- the forest area) and natural forest management and pro- ement has been reluctant to hand over forests to UGs. moted energy conservation through the distribution of The richness of the forest resource and the complex settle- improved stoves. Although many trees were planted, OED ment patterns in the region make identification of UGs a rated this project unsatisfactory. Inadequate attention to much more complex task. Even where forests have been training and capacity building resulted in a target-driven handed over to communities, social anomalies, including implementation schedule that thwarted the development of inequitable and unfair distribution of land and benefits, genuine community-based forestry operations. Ideas and have been reported. components borrowed from the first forestry project, in the hills, proved to be inappropriate for the different socio- Sharing Benefits, Making Choices economic conditions in the Terai. The "improved" stoves- Nepal's experience illustrates the widespread ramifications not properly tested even in the hills-often broke and did of community forestry. When it was being promoted in not suit local cooking requirements. the hills, the main objective was to protect a dwindling, The Hill Community Forestry Project, the third forestry degraded resource. Nobody anticipated that the forests project, helped establish the policy, legislative, and proce- could be rejuvenated enough to provide significant eco- dural framework needed to implement Nepal's community nomic returns. And the potential for such returns Precis 217 3 understandably made the government cautious about repli- There are indications that the poor may not have done cating the community-based hill model in the rich forest well under community forestry. High levels of illiteracy resource of the Terai. The finality of the decision to give among UG members are a limitation, and work particularly the forests to the UGs has added to the government's cau- to the detriment of the poor and the vulnerable. Issues of tion. Once the forests are handed over, there is no going benefit sharing in accordance with dependence, greater back. Currently there is no consensus among the govern- voice for the poor in decisionmaking, and special schemes ment and other stakeholders on a strategy for the Terai. to ensure that the poorest do not loose out in the initial Given the strong civil society movement, the presence of years of protection need increased attention. More of a numerous donors that are small, individual players, and a focus on research, marketing, trading, and development of government that retains ownership of the forest resource, a non-timber forest products would be a step in ensuring that facilitator may be needed to bring the parties to the table. the poor are not losers. In addition, the need to further The success of the community forestry program raises build the capacity of both the Forest Department and the many issues. When a previously degraded resource starts UGs to manage forests for sustainable utilization rather yielding substantial income, is it reasonable for the govern- than protection will require new and stronger skills. Part- ment to expect that the rejuvenated resource start con- nerships with both government and nongovernmental tributing toward the country's development efforts, organizations can extend the reach of both the Department especially in a country as poor as Nepal? Critics argue that and UGs, but these activities must be coordinated to pre- UGs are already contributing by supporting such efforts as vent duplication and the waste of scarce resources. village schools and bus shelters, but UG incomes vary. Is it fair if some villages are able to develop while others are left Donor Coordination behind? How should UGs contribute, given that commu- About 80 percent of Nepal's development budget comes nity forestry operates outside the national tax system? from numerous donors, who individually provide only small amounts.' The support of the international commu- Challenges of the Two Phases of Implementation nity has made it possible for Nepal to implement a pro- The main focus in the early years of implementation, gram of community forestry. But general lack of Phase I, was the identification and formation of UGs and coordination among donors has led to less efficient use of Ithe handing over of forestland to them for protection and available resources, confusion among field staff, and made- management. Challenges inherent in this phase included quate attention to important issues such as research. building the spirit of community participation among vil- Donors agree on the need for better coordination of their lagers that is essential to forming viable UGs, and putting activities, and recent efforts have led to substantial in place clear policies, laws, and procedures to implement improvements. Coordination of donor activities on the community forestry. Building capacity in the Forest ground, however, continues to be limited by their differing Department, the main implementing agency, to work with geographic foci and conditionality. the people in forest protection and management was also crucial. In addition, because rights to forestland can be Overall Lessons in Brief unclear, creating disputes, conflict resolution mechanisms The Nepalese experience offers lessons that have implica- were needed. tions for countries working toward both community partic- As community forestry became entrenched and forests ipation in forest protection and management and other matured, Phase II set in. The dominant idea in Phase I community-driven development activities. They include the was protection of forest resources and meeting the basic following: needs of the people. This mission shaped UG operational Particular attention must be paid to issues that affect the plans. Hence, even though mature forests are capable of lives of the poorest. In Nepal's agricultural economy, meeting more than the basic needs of the communities, development of the forest sector has a major impact on their full potential is not being realized. To build in- the lives of the poor, as fuetwood, fodder, and other country consensus on the major objective of community non-timber products gathered from nearby forests are an forestry-basic needs or more-is an important second important supplement to their daily labor income. phase challenge. In addition, the development of more Establishing the structure for the implementation of sophisticated conflict resolution mechanisms has become community forestry is the first phase. Phase 11 involves important, because the nature of the conflicts has changed integration of the program with other development as the value of the forest resource has increased. Non-UG efforts in the country and a consolidation of gains, a members note the value of protected forests, and want to much more challenging task. .in and share in the profits. UGs may violate their opera- Not all of the problems and challenges of implementing ional plans to take advantage of the commercial potential a community participation program can be visualized up of the forests. And the relationship of the UGs with other front. It is important to have an efficient monitoring and village development institutions has also been a cause of evaluation system to make mid-course corrections, when concern. needed. Technical assistance and sound monitoring and 4 World Bank Operations Evaluation Department evaluation are particularly important in a project that is Although community forestry may be a win-win strategy experimenting with and promoting new ideas. in the long run, using external support has short-run * Because the poor depend so heavily on forests, forest cost implications for the government. Support from the sector development should be part of the Bank's poverty international community made Nepal's community alleviation strategy in Nepal. In addition to increasing/ forestry program possible, but failure to coordinate regenerating forest cover, development objectives should donor efforts has worked to the detriment of both the be framed at least partly in terms of poverty alleviation. country and the donors. * The blind incorporation of project ideas and components from other areas is a recipe for failure, and Note hasty expansion of the use of an unproven measure can 1. See OED, The Drive to Partnership: Aid Coordination and be damaging, as in the case of the "improved cooking the World Bank (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2001); also stoves" in the Terai. Prrcis 201 (Washington, D.C.: OED, 2000). Recent OED Pr6cis 216 Promoting Environmentally Sosoainable Development 215 Rural Water Projects: Lessons Learned 214 Uganda: Policy, Participation, People 213 Developing African Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation 212 Chile's Model for Educating Poor Childrento etin obt t 211 Strengthening Tunisian Municipalities to Foster Local Urban 1-7e-o,OeaiosEauto earmn. rg~Iga Development , SectotandThouematintrylun 210 Connecting with the Information Revolution trsI An r ini a 209 Participation in Development Assistance 208 India: Improving the Development Effectiveness of Assistance 207 Adapting Transport Institutions to Romania's Transition Needs 206 Reforming India's Energy Sector (1978-99) 205 Progress in Java's Villages Assi stane s 204 ARDE 2001: From Strategy to Results 203 World Bank Forest Strategy: Striking the Right Balance il ri 202 Poverty Reduction in the 1990s: The World Bank Strategy 201 The Drive to Partnership: Aid Coordination and the World Bank i are avaflle to 03RAEMunve Igirec-rors and staff fom th 200 Evaluating Gender and Development at the World Bank Interna 1Tum tindFromregiona i _evi- ~enrs andaothl ulirro&h Wold BankFIInfoShop.ri r 199 Ghana: Building a Stronger Transportation System 198 Agricultural Extension: The Kenya Experience (te n 197 Toward a Comprehensive Development Strategy 196 Evaluation and the Development Challenge arp rldiBan 195 Poverty Assessments: Maximizing Impacts v l m, a.n tW~-an '~~onlJ . heyviZews"inghsppraetoeo 194 Involuntary Resettlement: The Large Dam Experience 193 Partnership for Education in Jordan 192 Reforming Bolivia's Power Sector PreMussird'son en an rcs enol ta dJ 191 Bangladesh: Progress Through Partnership ;p n 190 Transport in Indonesia 189 Health Care in Brazil: Addressing Complexity PrMgis 217 Community Forestry in Nepal ISSN 1564-6297