FORESTRY GOVERNANCE AND CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE CONTEXT OF

COMMUNITY FORESTRY IN NEPAL

Yuba Raj BhusalKrishna P. Acharya

Ministry of Forests and Soil ConservationGovernment 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 (1846-1950);•Nationalization Forests (Private Forests Nationalization Act, 1957);•However, deforestation continued- ‘Himalayan degradation debate’ 1970s;•Government alone not able to control deforestation. 0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

FRSO-1964 LRMP-1978 MPFS-1985 NFI-1994

Assessment Year

Are

a in

'000

ha

Forest Shrub Total Area

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.

19551955 20072007

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.