Community Forestry and Policy Instruments in Nepal: A Review

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of Nepal's forestry sector, detailing its contribution to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the evolution of its policies. It examines the historical context, including the shift from nationalized forests to community-based forestry programs, driven by the need for sustainable resource management and environmental protection. The report explores the policy formulation process, highlighting the roles of various stakeholders, including the Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, government bodies, and donor communities. It delves into the policy instruments, such as the Forest Act 1993 and Forest Regulations 1995, which facilitate community involvement through Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs). The report also discusses the economic and regulatory aspects of forestry policy, emphasizing decentralization, devolution, and democratization as key strategies for effective forest governance and the enhancement of rural livelihoods. Ultimately, it underscores the importance of community forestry as a crucial instrument for sustainable environmental practices and poverty reduction in Nepal. The analysis covers the constitutional provisions related to forest management, emphasizing the importance of biodiversity conservation and public awareness campaigns. The report concludes by emphasizing the critical need for continued research and the active participation of local communities for the effective management and conservation of Nepal's forests.

Introduction
In contrast to some countries in Asia, the management of forests gives about one percent to the
Gross-Domestic Product (GDP) while in Nepal it is approximated that forestry-sector gives
about 3.5 per cent of the national Gross-Domestic Product more so in the year two-thousand
(FAO, n.d). As reported by the National-Planning Commission-(2002), the sectors of forestry
and agriculture contributed to 39.3 per cent of the country’s Gross-Domestic Product ( from
which the forestry-sector alone accounted for 15 per cent) (MOFSC, 2010). The government
policies developed initially in 1967 by the National-Forest Plan (NFP, 1967) in Nepal sensitized
and over-emphasized the serious need for community-forestry program. As a result, the
conventional Forestry Act was amended in the year 1977 by creating policy-provisions regarding
giving out part of government forested-areas to the smallest-local-governance unit (HMG, 1978).
More importantly, this further led to the creation of by-laws regarding forestry known as Forest-
Rules in the year 1978 aimed at proper execution of the program.
In the year 2000, the Ministry-of-Forests and Soil-Conservation (MFCS) developed a better and
revised-policy suitable for forestry sector program. This led to the upgrade of the main master-
plan for forestry sector and the expected additional amendments deemed necessary. In the
upgraded policy manual are the establishment blueprints, programs and the necessary finance
needed for forestry-sector establishment. Better still, the revised-policy acknowledges the
establishment of Agricultural-Prospective Plan (APP), the Environmental Policies of Nepal and
its action-plan and the National-Biodiversity action-plan. The upgraded forestry-sector policy of
the year 2000 details clear alternative means of forests management especially in Terai, Churia
and Inner Terai areas of the entire country.

Forestry sector policy of the year 2000 is aimed at meeting the requirements-needs of the people
with respect to fuel-wood, timber-provision and fodder; to ensure sustainable food productivity
levels; to ensure that there is better land conservation from the negative effects of soil erosion,
water run-off, mass-landslides, land-desertification and other forms of detrimental environmental
activities; to ensure there is considerable economic growth and development both at local and
national levels as well as promoting participatory approach of the people in the forestry sector
and land conservation; to promote the legal-framework within which the individual’s
participation, societies and other organization’s contributions to land-conservation and forestry
resources are well anchored and finally to upgrade and ensure well bonded the organizational
environmental-framework as well as the institutions in the sectorial segment of forestry.
Moreover, forests are considered to be very essential resources that form part of the country as
depicted by the constitution. With regards to the Nepal’s constitution of the year 2015, the
government shall establish policies that ensures sustainable usage of biodiversity by conserving,
protecting and managing forests, that is flora and fauna to help minimize the detrimental effects
of industries establishment and to ensure continued education through public awareness
campaign on environmental conservation and protection as well anchored in the article 5 sub-
section 1 of the constitution.
Background
The environmental protection has been guided by the some element of reality depicted from a
very famous slogan in Nepal by “Hariyo Ban Nepal Ko Dhan (Green forests are the wealth of
Nepal)”. Although, as this principle was applauded in Nepal but the nationalization of all-

Nepalese forests in the year 1957 created some loopholes that facilitated open-access leading the
notion of the ‘tragedy-of-the-commons’. As a result of this, forest-conservationists, research-
scientists and various forest-administrators gave an alarming concern regarding the increasing
trend of destruction of the Himalayan-environmental state in the recent previous years of 1960s
and 1970s. The government policy to nationalize all forests in Nepal led lack of confidence
among the people based of the steps taken by the Nepalese governments with regards to forest
protection. Additionally, with the continued increase in population trend which would most
likely depend on the adjoining forests for satisfaction of essential needs like firewood, fuel,
fodder and timber. Due to such kind of acts, the forests became in a deplorable condition that
could not be sustainable for forest management activities. In the end, this resulted to destruction
of forests in the form of accelerated-forests-encroachment, increased level of illegal-logging and
constant deforestation-trend. The government having recognize this kind of worrying trend,
developed an action plan called community-forestry program.
Consequently, the community-forestry program was particularly developed with a clear aim of
satisfying the subsistence requirements of the people from the locality as well as ensuring that
forests are protected through transferal of economic forest-resource user-rights to the society-
local users. The inclusion of community in the forestry programs have facilitated change in
denuded-landscape restoration and at the same time results to opportunities meant for production
of various forest-products and services for the bigger partners starting from local-community to
global community.
As per the community-forests, some portion of government-forests are given to a family (group)
of local-households referred to as Community-Forest User-Groups (CFUG). The group is tasked
with management-plan preparation as per their requirements and managing the forests as

depicted by the management-plan to ensure proper and better resource-utilization at the same
time protecting and conserving forests. The community-Forest User-Groups (CFUG) assumes
that the users are unified and able to manage the community-forests for their mutual gain and
interests. Although, the needs and taste of the various local-households involved in community-
forests are varied as depicted by their economic prowess and strength. The underprivileged
families would like to use the more for subsistence satisfaction like food, fodder and firewood
whereas the have it may use the more for their commercial gains like selling timber.
The maintenance of delicate and essential ecosystems is all depended upon the forests. It is
through this that forests provides solutions to the emerging-issues like climate-change, increase
demand for bio-energy, water-needs, natural-disaster and its goal to reduce poverty level (Food
and Agricultural-Organization (FAO), 2019). For one to reduce the level of deforestation, an
increased interest among scientific-researchers and people concerned with policy making for
establishment and evaluation of effective alternative techniques of forest management needs to
be engaged (Gurung et al, 2012). With the forest forming part of emerging concerns or issues,
there exists need for total participation of the local people for sustainable forest-management. As
per Gurung et al (2012) society’s inclusion in the forestry management is a very essential
requirement for better conservation and protection of forests.
Process of forest policy formulation
Policy making process is Nepal is clearly explained and dictated. Normally the sectorial policy
development initiative is given at the sectorial level in the ministry, the MFSC for forestry
related issues (Mathema et al, 1998). Where matters of forest preservation, management or
exploitation of national aspects emerge or observed by the officers in the field, they are presented

to appropriate head of the department. Therefore, the department is then tasked to examine the
issues raised carefully and after sufficient burden of proof beyond reasonable ground drafts the
needed new policy that in the end is reported to the MFSC, normally to the secretary charged to
head administration in the ministry. Found in the ministry level are the senior-officials that
discusses the matters raised and deems it fit if there need to develop a new policy where the
secretary is tasked to give information to the Minister for Forests and Soil-Conservation. In
situations where new government has been established, the minister in charge of MFSC directs
the secretary to develop a new policy in tandem with the government in rule as per their dictated
policy.
As stated by Mathema et al (1998), deliberations and conversation are done at a level that is a
notch higher by the highest level officials from MFSC and other partners with donor-
communities, and a task-force is then developed to come up draft of the policy-paper. The inputs
of departmental director general is also sought and included. The task-force is expected to
interact and capture views of various parties or agencies. In normal practice restricted
conversations or interaction often happen due limited time or if there is need to maintain high
level of official confidentiality. Nevertheless, the current approach by the MSFC facilitated
exchange of ideas among the concerned people (for example, donors, FUGs, NGOs). Further, the
association with donors also promoted at conferences of the Forestry-Sector Co-ordination
Committee (FSCC) led by the secretary found in the MFSC, where all the group-members of
FSCC also promotes the exercise of policy development.

Approval of policy
As soon as the policy-paper has been established, the secretary of the MFSC presents it to the
minister for consent. The consented policy-paper is thereafter forwarded to the cabinet-
secretariat as the forestry-sector policy-proposal for recommendation and adoption by the
council-of-ministers (the cabinet) being led by the Prime Minister. Therefore, the cabinet-
secretariat led by the Chief-Secretary examines the proposed policy for relevancy and further
action and eventually forward it to the cabinet meeting for further approval. Lastly, the
approved-proposal is published as the forestry-sector policy of the state.
Policy instruments
The Forest Act 1993 as well as the Forest Regulations of 1995 is put into force as the min legal
instrument for promotion of community forestry in the nation upon the restoration of democracy
in Nepal in 1990. The law created the rights of the local people over the resources of the forest as
was treated as a major instrument in the management of the forest of Nepal
Policy instruments are often grouped into broad groups including economic, regulatory as well as
means of information or instruments. Economic instruments are as well known as financial or
even fiscal instruments. Fiscal instruments for instance royalty, subsidy, tax as well as market
systems for the products of the forest are perceived as a major part of the community forest
policy for Nepal and have relatively signficnt implications on the forest resources management
alongside their benefits to the community dwellers. In as much as the Community Forest
program in Nepal started way back in 1978 as a trial by the movement alongside aid agencies in
providing an alternative approach for management of the national forests by the Forest
Department through involving the local residents, a legal as well as procedural platform for the

local dwellers in organising themselves into users of community forest group as a single
institution for forest management was outlined by the Forest Act 1993 as well as the Forest
Regulation of 1995. The Act as well as the Regulation nevertheless is less explicitly with regard
to fiscal policy in comparison with the other policy instruments.
The forestry community of Nepal has turned out to be an illustration of progressive legislation as
well as policies in devolvement as well as decentralization of forest management power. The
decentralization policy is the forestry sector insinuates the national institutions of forestry have
to focus on supporting the efforts of local development. Within the context of Nepal, the
communities are guaranteed exclusion, access, withdrawal as well as management rights even
though not alienation with regard to forest management. Other than this, the district forest
officers are expected to work very closely and jointly with the administrators of the local
governments in development as well as implementation of activities of forestry. Still, the
responsibility of forest user group network with regard to legal advocacy, development of
democratic governance as well as capacity building to a great extent demonstrate the unique
strength of the approach of community forestry in Nepal.
Forest governance decentralizations have been enhanced as a way of conservation of forests in a
manner that is more effective at the same time enhancing the livelihoods that rely on forests and
rural regions. Devolution, democratization as well as decentralizations are the major points of
focus that would have an impact on the numerous aspects of development and planning of forests
in the times to come. Community forestry has been established to be one of the most effective
policy instrument applicable to National Forestry policy since it offers a realistic approach words
sustainable utilization of environment as well as enhancement of livelihoods of the dwellers in
the rural areas where a large percentage live below the poverty line. The phrases decentralizing

as well as devolution within the contest of Nepal forestry are used in describing administrative
functions and power relocation from focal point or a central location to:
 Political structures in the local areas for instance administrative village or sub-district
category
 Forest bureaucracy local or regional offices
 Natural users which encompasses teams created by local social processes
The Nepal community forestry program is a component of the global trend towards devolution of
forest that began more than four decades that offers legal chances for the local communities to
take part in the management as well as usage of the forest resources. The devolution has been
acknowledged as a major milestone in the management of natural resources and is normally
credited with aiding in the successful curbing of deforestation; protection of the forests as well as
revitalization of the degraded forests while at the same time supports the livelihoods of the local
people. Recent research proposes it might as well enhance storage of carbon.
Policy Evaluation
Community participation in the management of forests has been established to aid in enhancing
the income of the households as well as lowering the levels of poverty among the households
that take part in the same as per the research carried out by Sony, Sekot and Vacik. This renders
the policy a success in terms of attains the goals of reducing the levels of poverty.
A framework is provided by the Forestry Sector Policy (2000) for use in the systematic
implementation of different programs of development within the forest sector. The policy
prioritizes on CF programs mostly for the case of hill forests even as emphasis is on
collaborative forest management for the case of Terai. The policy outlines streamlining the

policy of pricing of the various forest products generated from the national forests that are as
well inclusive of the community forests so as to produce revenues for management as well as
development of forests. It provides a framework for sharing of the returns between CFUG and
the national government depending on the gross incomes from the sales of timber even though
does not show community forest management cost.
Still the policy does not talk about sharing of the revenue between CFUGs and units of local
government. Forestry Sector Policy discusses sharing of revenue between the CFUG and central
government even though does not mention a thing on the local government units. There is need
for an elaborate discussion between the units of government, CFUGs alongside other
stakeholders to aid in evading the unclarity in the sharing of revenue and hence get to a common
consensus.
For the case of Terai CFUGs for instances, 40% of the income from excess timber have to be
deposited in the account of the government. The policy received very strong opposition from
FECOFUN and upon engaging in a long debate that involved the FECOFUN and authorities
from the government, the amount was lowered to 15% and was confined to the sale of two
species of timber only which included Sal-Shorea robusta and Khair-Acacia catechu in Terai.
The units of the local governments however did not reap any revenues from the income.
The policy lays emphasis on promotion of NTFPs commercialization and their exportation upon
value adding to foreign countries. Forest certification is however untouched which is of
importance in the exportation of forest products since numerous foreign countries are hesitant to
acquire the uncertified produce. In addition, it focused on offering opportunities for livelihood to
the landless and poor in activities related to forestry and pay instant revenue to the poor in the
rural regions who were gathering raw materials including aromatic as well as medicinal plants

for the industries. The policy as well discusses promoting the local communities in growing the
commercial forest crops in regions bearing the needed conditions as well as to create processing
enterprises based on the forests off the community forest. It does not however talk about
financial management as well as technical resources that are needed in the creation of such
enterprises by CFUGs.
Integration of science
The company has shifted from feudal society using the locally institutional arrangements
relevant for the management of natural resources during the time via a phase associated with
nationalization of forest as well as use of scientific Managment through central controls to the
current scenario in which significant power is undergoing devolvement to institutions of
decentralized government as well as local authorities. Nevertheless, there exists uncertainty
linked with the community forestry still in the initial phase. The foresters tend to be careful of
relocating the forest management to the control of unskilled local people who do not have the
technical knowhow hence resulting in enforced regulatory framework as opposed to enabling.
Good science is need and has been incorporated in the policy strategies in transferring technical
knowledge of Silvi-cultural norms to the thumb rules for ease of application by the community
dwellers.
Science has been incorporated within the policy of community forestry visions is managing
community forests depending on good science to ascertain the community forest is the major
timber source as well as reap economic benefits from CFs by forest product sales as well as
services via sustainable management. Hence, it is of importance that a strategy is structured to
attain the goal alongside balance conservation with usage and vice versa.

The government has come up with land use planning with the aim of integrating the scientist
concern when it comes to development of forest region. Still, the role of conservation as well as
management of forests and the proceeded regions has been grouped into various categories. The
productivity of the resource base alongside attaining a balance between sustainable use and
conservation of the natural resources has resulted in the introduction of scientific land use
planning. At the same time, the approach of scientific landscape has been started in the
management of biological diversity. The land as well as forestry resources will be used and
managed as per their ecological statues in a bid to attain conservation of the soil, water, forests as
well as biodiversity and simultaneously meeting the people’s basic needs.
Recommendations
 Training as well as development of skills required in conducting NTFPs sustainable
harvesting as well as support of the forest-based enterprises development by the
government
 Diversification of the source of incomes from community forests is needed as the
currently income is constrained to marketing of the non-timber alongside timber forest
produce. The government has to permit diversification of the resources by the
communities including giving them mining rights and permitting them to conduct hunting
of the non-endangered species of wild animals as well as fishing as the forest is made of
numerous extra resources.
 Amendment should be done to the existing regulations and policies to make sure all
CFUGs obtain adequate resources as well as support for updating the forest management
plan

 Make sure constructive CFUGs participation in the mechanisms as well as processes of
policy alongside conservation programs. This will as well aid in coming up with
successful correlation between the community and government pegged on mutual trust
and respect.
 An avalanche of strategies is needed since the forest policies tend to be interrelated as
well as multidimensional. The major points bearing a direct effect on attainment of SFM
include:
 Land use planning
 Enhanced fuel wood, non-timber, timber as well as fodder products
 Minimization of consumption
 Effective distribution as well as marketing
 Facilitation of private forestry