Open Journal of Forestry 2014. Vol.4, No.1, 58-69 Published Online January 2014 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojf) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojf.2014.41010 The Local Environmental, Economic and Social Tragedies of International Interventions on Community Based Forest Management for Global Environmental Conservation: A Critical Evaluation Bhubanes wor Dhakal Support for Development, Christchurch, New Zealand Email: Bhubaneswordhakal@gmail.com Received October 16th, 2013; revised November 21st, 2013; accepted December 19th, 2013 Copyright © 2014 Bhubaneswor Dhakal. This is an open access article dis tributed un der the Creative Co mmons Attribution License, which pe rmits unrestricted use, distribu tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In accordance of the Creative Commons Attribution License all Copyrights © 2014 are reserved f or SCIRP and the owner of the intellectual property Bhubanes wor Dhakal. All Copyright © 2014 are guarded by law and by SCIRP as a guardian. This study reviewed the policies and outcomes of international support for forest management in Nepal and answered whether international support on forest management in developing countries resulted in positive socioeconomic and environmental outcomes at local communities. The evaluation is based on the socio-ecological theory and synergies-tradeoff model of forestry ecosystems goods and services. The study shows that the international interventions influenced national policies and community forestry prac- tices, w hich contributed to the remarkable increase of forest stock. The new forestry institutions increased timber product supplies to urban users and contributed to offsetting of greenhouse gas emission of afflu- ent societies in overseas. However, the intervention spoiled centuries of old forestry practices, which had contributed to the evolvement of socio-ecological condition, sustained local economy and environment systems. The new forestry institutions and practices locked local opportunities of multipurpose uses of forest, worsened water yield and local knowledge, and hampered local economic activities. Consequently they affected habitat diversities for forest based species, and forest resource supplies for sustaining agro- biodiversities and local food security. In reality the interventions increased benefit to distant users (urban users in the country and affluent societies in overseas) and further marginalized local communities and particularly socially disadvantaged people. The paper shows that the international forestry policies and supports are technically wrong or poorly based on science which is against their promise of providing better technical supports and benefiting local communities in developing countries. It argues that the in- terventions created many complexities in forestry institutions and practices which require too costly en- deavor to change and address the local socioeconomic and environmental problems. The paper has ex- plained the root cause of the international policy problem on many schools of thought. Keywords: Socio-Ecological Systems; Community Abuse; Synergies-Tradeoff Model; Kaleidoscopic Case Introduction Forestry is a common property in many developing countries and particularly in mountain regions. The resource has multiple, competing uses for environmental conservation and human wellbeing (Karsenty & Ongolo, 2011). Most environmental policy analysts argued that the forests are poorly and ineffi- ciently managed, which has exacerbated environmental prob- lems. International policies and supports are believed to im- prove resource management efficiency, increase local socioe- conomic benefits and contribute to global environmental con- servation (Douglas & Simula, 2010). Many policies and field activities have been implemented at national, regional and in- ternational initiation for many years. There is also a counter argument that the forest managed for global benefit can lead tradeoffs outcomes to local communities, affect both communi- ties and ecosystems and worsen the mountain vulnerabilities (Hausler, 1993; Ives & Messerli, 1989). The argument is based on the fact that social, economic and environmental systems in developing countries are complex, often vulnerable and strong- ly attached with forestry resources (Jodha, 2001; Ives & Mes- serli, 1989). Inappropriate intervention can disestablish existing systems and make social and environmental problems worse. However, critical problems of international interventions par- ticularly on the management of common property forest in mountain context are poorly explained and documented in lite- rature. The aim of the study is to synthesize existing knowledge about international forest policies. Specifically this study re- viewed emerging local environmental, economic and social problems associated with international interventions on man- aging common property forest resources for global environ- OPEN ACCESS 58
B. DHAKAL mental conservation. It means that the focus of the study was on emerging problems of the forest management, whi ch was asso- ciated with international interventions. This study was carried out with the assumption that the international forest policies and external supports overlooked local importance of the com- mon property forests and indigenous forestry practices, and exacerbated local problems. This study is based on opinion and literature review and par- ticularly the case of international interventions for community- based forest management in Nepal. Information available from desktop literature review and other secondary sources are used to support the arguments and opinions. In addition this study applied theories, intuitive logic, learning from work experience, published material and field research to explain the problems. These approaches are popularly used in the literature particu- larly in cross-disciplinary issues (Karsenty & Ongolo, 2011). This study limited explaining the problems of external inter- vention on the following issues: Biodiversity, water and local knowledge conservation, climate change adaptation, food secu- rity, economic development and social abuses. Regarding structure of this paper, the importance of multi- purpose management of the common property forest for moun- tain rural communities and the model of synergies and tradeoffs of forest ecosystems are described in the two subsequent sec- tions. Other section provides a brief account of history of inter- national interventions on the Nepal’s forestry sector. Then the emerging local environmental, economic and social problems are described. The causes of the problems of the interventions are described on different views before concluding the paper. The Importance of Multipurpose Management of Forests and Evolution of Socio-Ecological Systems Nepal, as a mountain country, has a special significance of forestry resources particularly human modified ecosystems. Its land environmentally safe for human settlement and farming uses are distributed in patches. The mountain communities were settled and carried out farming in the environmentally safe lands (a low risk of landslides and malaria). The limits of envi- ronmentally safe land resulted in the existence of agricultural land patches inside or adjoining public forests and small-size of private land holdings. The unsafe lands were managed as a common property and used together in forest and pasture pro- duction to meet the broader needs of communities and envi- ronments. The communities used multiple products and servic- es of the common property to complement private resources and sustain livelihoods (Dhakal et al., 2011; Hobley, 1996). Products and services derived from the joint management com- plement farmland resources and contribute to sustaining the livelihoods of mountain people with small size of landholdings. Therefore, almost all communities have some areas under common or public forest and many kinds of wild animals in the forests close to human settlement. The multipurpose manage- ment and common property systems eased transfer of other resources (e.g. crop and animal genetics and local knowledge) between agroclimatic zones. The forest resources, thus, have been an integral part of agricultural and other socioeconomic systems in the societies. The multipurpose management system also reduced the wild- life effects on agriculture and provided habitat for many wild- life species. The centuries old community practices of manag- ing the forestry resources for multiple uses have modified nat- ural systems which resulted in the development of social-eco- logical systems (e.g., forest product based agro-biodiversity and indigenous knowledge) that significantly shape ecosystems in the Nepali mountain landscape today. This land distribution pattern hardly found in most European countries where the land is extensively privatized and used in farming, e.g., 75 per cent of the land area in UK. The interactions of the social and eco- logical systems have not only determined the provisioning of ecosystem goods and services but also contributed to the de- velopment and sustaining of new ecosystems (e.g., wild biodi- versity in farm and human modified forest and pasture sys- tems). Some social groups in the country have a nomadic style of living and others have high dependency on the land resources in managed communal systems. Unlike farmers in western and other societies, the communities used only a small land area to cultivate crops though it was insufficient to feed the families. They practiced cultivating the land once in 5 years or so (Rasul & Thapa, 2003). They complemented the private resources by forest resources, particularly non-timber products, and sus- tained their living. The non-timber forest products could reach harvestable size in a short time and be available mostly free throughout the year. That is the fact to have a higher proportion of forest areas and rich biodiversity around their community areas. The critical role of the forestry and farming practices in sustaining environmental resources are hardly recognized in environmental literature. The lands traditionally used under shifting cultivation practices, nomadic systems or managed in common are registered as public forests. These are now exces- sively controlled by state authorities. The territories of the in- digenous people have been used for environmental conserva- tion in national elite and international interests. The communi- ties are squeezed in marginal lands, and forced them to grow crop in environmentally sensitive lands and shorter rotation period. The forest based people are blamed for encroaching on environmentally sensitive land and using forest resources (Ra- sul & Thapa, 2003) but the fact of evolving the resource use practices and reasons of current changes in their practices are ignored. Community forest has a special importance for agricultural and forest biodiversity conservation. According to CBS (2008) endanger wild animals and plant species exist not only in the protected areas in Nepal but in farming and community forest areas. Many birds, wild animals and invertebrates share habitats in both forest and farmlands. Maintaining the biodiversity needs diversity of habitats, which requires diversity in forest condition. Community forests are small in area, average 93 ha per community with most less than 60 ha in size at current con- ditions (Kanel et al., 2012). The diversity in resource and habi- tat condition is less likely to be naturally created. Mountain communities were used to practicing coppicing and lopping of forest trees for multipurpose uses. Allowing the practices en- hanced habitat diversities for forest species and supplied re- sources supporting agro-biodiversities. Crops in farming land provided refuge for many wildlife species on the forest edge especially during natural disasters (e.g., forest fires) and feed in scarce seasons. Nepal is a home to many typical local breeds of cattle, buf- falo, sheep, and goats (CBS, 2008), which were fed on the community forest pasture for centuries because of the limited private land resources for feed. In the 1985/86 survey, public OPEN ACCESS 59
B. DHAKAL forest contributed about 70 per cent of livestock feed require- ments in the high hills, 39 per cent in the mid hills, 15 per cent in the Terai, and 60 per cent in the Siwaliks region (MPFS, 1988). The share of forest fodder for livestock feed under the current management system, however, has been negligible in most communities. The practices of grazing and tree harvesting for other uses suppressed aggressive weeds and created diver- sity in the habitat matrix, which enhanced and maintained the diversity of both animal and plant species. The practices, for instance, enhanced the habitat of some bird species and were particularly popular in controlling insects in farm lands, which requires moderately open forest conditions and bushes. Alpine land is another important common property in the mountainous areas, which occupy over 10 per cent of total land area in Nepal (CBS, 2008). Its vegetation consists of seasonal pasture species and perennial plants, including shrubs, but trees are rare. The resources could be used in the transhumance prac- tice that requires seasonal movement of animals to different agro-climatic zones. Most livestock was managed under the Kharka system (mobile grazing system). Grazing in the forests was rotational, based on seasonal availability of feed on farms and in the forests (Graner, 1997). Transhumance herds grazed alpine pasture during the rainy and autumn seasons and re- quired access to pastureland in warmer places during the cold season. During the winter and spring seasons, those animals also fed on forest-based tree fodder in addition to grazing. The supply of forest fodder was also essential for farmers in other regions when farm fodder ran out, particularly in spring and summer. The practice of livestock grazing and other uses of alpine resources suppressed weeds and other unwanted invasive species (Dhar et al., 1997), which created habitat diversity for wild plant and animal species (Kala, 2004). In addition, seeds of many wild plants get treated and spread through the dung of grazing animal. The common property resource played a crucial role in de- veloping and sustaining farm crop and animal biodiversity. Sustaining the transhumance practice requires changing places for livestock grazing in different communities and agro-climatic zones. The practice provided opportunities to cross breed high altitude livestock species, which enriched diversity in the gene pool of the livestock population (Kharel et al., 2005). Those animals were placed on and fed in cropping lands during winter for farm fertilization. Traditionally, many varieties of local vegetables, herbs, spices and other food crops and breeds of livestock were sustained on the forest resources and livestock compost. Some of the plant s pecies are c hemical fert ilizer into- lerant (Raut et al., 2012). Poor rural houses require forest products to complement their private resource and so sustain their livelihood because of pos- sessing insufficient private land resources and a poor level of livelihood assets (Dhakal et al., 2011). Non-timber forest prod- ucts are the main inputs to leverage their farm economic activi- ties and the means to utilize their spare work time for income generation. Communities used to follow a coppicing system for firewood and a lopping practice for fodder collection under traditional forest management systems that produced consider- able amount of daily needed products for the people. The prac- tices had increased the availability of other products (poles and stakes for agricultural uses) and created some open spaces in the forest allowing other non-timber species to grow under the trees (Harrop, 2007). One problem in disadvantaged Nepali communities is low level of local economic activity that leads to the region being less attractive for development investment. Young people and active labour force hardly live in the communities. Members of rural communities are now bearing huge social and emotional costs (e.g. increasing marriage divorce and mental sickness from family isolation) because of migrating of young people and parents to work in overseas such as the Middle East and Malaysia (Gartaula et al., 2012). The forest resource supported local employment would provide people an opportunity to live with family, provide emotional needs and care, and help com- munities, which are not possible while working in the overseas. Local employment and income generation opportunities are extremely important to women who socially have less access to and more risks in off-community and overseas employment. Increasing production of non-timber products would many other people including retired and frustrated from jobs who would like to be returned in their communities and engaged in some economic activities. Through many years of practice and experience, mountain communities have identified several kinds of local resources and their utilization techniques to solve the problems of re- source scarcity, health nuisance and natural disaster (Dong et al. 2007). People in disadvantaged communities require, for in- stance, local forest species that can be used to relieve physical stresses and control incursions of pests and diseases. Much local knowledge and some cultural features are based on forest resources and mostly on non-timber forest products. The re- sources, skills and services of traditional knowledge are more valuable for rural women and other poor people who have poor access to or affordability of modern services (Rokaya et al., 2010). The information must be continuously updated, which can often be costly to provide from a research approach for local decision making. It is also too costly to document locally valuable knowledge and teach it to people. The knowledge generally passes by word of mouth from people who observe or practice the activity. Availability of the resources had made it possible to pass local knowledge and skills from the older gen- eration to a younger one by word of mouth and actual practice. Farmers and others working in alpine regions were sources of information and suppliers of herbal medicines for rural com- munity, which was important particularly for people in disad- vantaged and remote communities, and natural disaster condi- tions (Dong et al., 2007). The above discussions show that the centuries old communi- ty practices of managing forests for multiple purposes resulted in the development and sustaining resources and environmental systems adaptable to the biophysical and socioeconomic condi- tions. According to Folke et al. (2003) the modified system can be termed as the coupled social-ecological system and used as an analytical framework to evaluate provisioning of natural, socioeconomic and cultural products and services regulated and sustained by a system created by interactions of biophysical and social phenomena. The framework is considered relevant to evaluate how localized socioeconomic and environmental sys- tems are impacted by the international interventions on com- munity forest management. The synergies and tradeoffs model of forestry product and services is included to clari fy biophy si- cal phenomena. The Science of Synergies and T radeoffs of Forest Ecosystem Services Experimental based studies show that ecosystems services of forest vary with management models (Phelps et al., 2012; OPEN ACCESS 60
B. DHAKAL Kapos et al., 2012; Strassburg et al. , 2012; Amato et al., 2011; Thompson et al., 2009; Bruijnzeel, 2004). Following the theo- ries the synergies and tradeoffs of some ecosystems services under different levels of tree canopy cover in a hypothetical community forest can be illustrated as in Figure 1. The figure indicates that increasing forest canopy conver increases carbon storage (climate change mitigation service) and reduces soil erosion (enhance soil conservation service) upto certail level. It enhances biodiversity conservation services in some extent and then reduces. However, the increasing forest cover reduce downstrem flow (water service). Soil erosion level might also be increased again in some level at extreem canopy cover condition of the tree though it is not explicit in the graph. The synergies and tradeoffs model implies that many ecosystems services of forest would be provisioned at higher level under moderate than extreme canopy cover condition. The moderate canopy condition provides a room to produce a significant amount of products valuable in supporting economies in com- munities and livelihood of local people. History and Problems of External Intervention on Mountain Forest Management Most forests in the mountains were traditionally managed under a community system with multiple uses for the broader needs of communities. Substantial forest degradation happened around district and regional headquarters following the political system change 1951 due to increasing of public construction and town development activities (Hobley, 1996). Coincidental- ly, in the early 1970s extreme rainfall occurred causing devas- tating landslides in Nepal and flooding in Bangladesh1. Interna- tional agencies blamed on local farmers for the deforestation, landslides and flooding problems and started interventions on the forest and pasture resource management. One of the reasons to increase their interventions on the forest management since 1980s is to make contribution on global climate change mitiga- tion (Hausler, 1993). Table 1 shows the key dates and interna- tional agencies influencing common property forest manage- ment in Nepal. Critical details of international interventions are presented by Hobley (1996), Hausler (1993) and Ives and Mes- serli (1989). The international pressurized the government to change the indigenous forest management and using practices (Hobley, 1996; Ives & Messerli, 1989). The aid agencies con- Figure 1. A general model of synergies and tradeoffs of some ecosystems services under different levels of tree canopy cover in a hypothetical community forest. sidered that the technical, financial and institutional capacities of the Nepal government were very poor to manage forests appropriately and international support on the issues, including policy advocacy, would conserve forest and halt environmental problems. The international agencies misinterpreted the mountain re- source management practices and problems, and carried out interventions without due consideration on social, economic and other environmental consequences from their interventions. According to the Forestry Sector Master Plan “[T]he main causes of forest degradation are overcutting of wood for fuel and heavy lopping of trees for fodder” (MPFS, 1988: p. 31). The plan was developed under their strict technical guidance and support of the international agencies (Hobley, 1996; Haus- ler, 1993). The plan discouraged the use of local forest practices and non-timber forest products, which were practices of hun- dreds of years to meet the broader needs of communities (MPFS, 1988). The data and estimation processes were mani- pulated which resulted over exaggeration of demand and unde- restimation of supply of timber (Hrabovszky & Miyan, 1987). It was planned, funded and practiced for “reducing and control- ling livestock numbers” of mountain farmers (MPFS, 1988 p. 148) even though livestock farming was the engine and inspira- tion to sustain farming systems and maintain economic and environmental vitality in the mountain region (Hausler, 1993). The plan focused forest management to increase timber and firewood supplies to urban users and industries and gave little value to increased non-timber forest products to meet local community demands (Dhakal, 2011; MPFS, 1988). The agen- cies advised specially to introduce industrial model of forest management in the name of providing technical support of international experts for improve management of the commu- nity based forests. Though the donor agencies implemented the Master Plan by establishing their own organizations (often called “forestry development project”) parallel to government bodies (Edmonds, 2003), under expatriates’ leadership or advice, they played wrong role model. They ignored local problems while imple- menting the Master Plan. Government agencies considered themselves weak in technical capacity for institutional building so followed the forest development model of the donor agen- cies in other districts with no direct involvement of the interna- tional agencies. They relied on the assumption that donors’ working model was superior. The protected areas expanded dramatically as IUCN and WWF intervened in the protected area programme including the preparation of conservation planning (Basnet, 2003). The area of Nepal occupied by protected areas has increased now over 21 per cent (CBS, 2011). Until the 1970s, the national parks and wildlife reserves had occupied only three per cent of the national land area and established in the forests and other community areas convenient for recreational use by king Shaha families. IUCN intervened the Nepal government’s policies to extend protected areas in forest rich regions to meet its global target of increasing protected areas. The aid agencies provided technical advices, financial supports and personal development incentives to motivate decision makers of conservation agen- cies for expanding the protected areas in poor community areas where local livelihoods were mainly based on the resources of the common forests. Otherwise the expansion would have oc- curred only in some regions or small areas. The REDD policy, endorsed in the global climate summit, 1According to the UN Climate Change Report (2007), the global rainfall pattern remarkably changed from this time and Australia also experienced devastating floods in t his period. OPEN ACCESS 61
B. DHAKAL Table 1. Key dates and international agencies influenced on forest management in Nepal (Sources: Hausler, 1993; MPFS, 1988; GOA, 2012). 1970s Extreme rainfall occurred causing de vastating landslides in Nepal a nd f l ooding in Bangladesh from World Warned that Nepali farmers followed wrong farming and forestry practices which were leading towards serious environmental disasters in Nepa l and downstrea m (Eckholm, 1975). Introduced and supported tree plantation, mostly exotic pine species in pasturelands and multipurpose use forests of poor communities. The government and other a i d agencies fol lowed the model to show physical pr ogress of fores try The World Bank warned int ernational l y that all forests in Nepal would be wi ped out within t wo decade s i f t raditiona l forest practices would not h alted. The practices would create a severe environmental catastrophe in the country and -1988 Bank, USAID, UK aid, SDC, FINNIDA, GTZ Influenced on the government policies of natural resource management by policy dia logues, advocacy and off er of financial supports. They shifted their technical advices and financial support from integrated rural development to forest plantation and protection. -Smith, the British ned that m ount ain farmers kept unsustai nable num bers of livestock, exceeding the carrying capacity of the forest which caused deforestation and accelerated soil erosion in the mountain. ment Bank and Provided technical support and guidance to de velop Forestr y Sector M aster Plan for 25 years which dictate d t o “reduce and control livestock”, cease indigenous forestry practices (lopping of tree branches for fodder and firewood) and increase plantation an d timber production to meet urban and industrial needs. The plan was greatly influenced by Eckholm (1975), the World Bank (1978) and Wyatt-Smith (1982) reports. Increased influences at policy and implementation levels to expand protected areas and meet their global target -2006 World Bank, SDC, DFID, AUSAID , DANIDA, The agencies used provided financial and technical support and hastily carried out forestry conservation activities (format i on of user group assigning forest management res ponsibility, forestry plantation and protecti on) following the conce pt of the Forestry Master Plan (1988). Local socioeconomic and other environmental effe ct cared little. The government introduced the Forest Amendment Act in 1998 and a mandatory forest i nventory was introduced to regulate forest uses as directed by “Sustainable Forestry” in Agenda 21 and contribute to global climate chang e mitigation. The policy has dictated compulsory forest inventories and limited forest harvesting to 50% of the mean annual increment of fore s t . Introduced Reduced Emission from Deforesta t ion and Forest Degrada t i on ( REDD) polic y and the Wor ld Bank selected Nepal for REDD policy experimentation. Introduced many REDD projects and continued funding for protected area expansion in community forests. Bali 2007, is another international intervention in community forest management in Nepal. International agencies were inter- ested in giving continuity to their past businesses of forest ex- pansion and protection in Nepal, and in contributing to the global environmental conservation goal. The main objective of the REDD policy is to reduce the community uses of forest products and enrich the forest carbon stock to offset global greenhouse emissions produced by affluent societies and indus- tries in developed countries. The international agencies would like to restrict local practices of using forest products and man- age the resources in an intact natural condition. Table 2 shows the names of the implementing and funding agencies of the REDD projects (GON, 2012). Despite the pilot phase pro- gramme it has been implemented in 58 districts out of 75 dis- tricts in the country. The REDD experimentations are also done even in very poor and tribal communities (Uprety e l at., 2011). It has advised and funded enrichment plantations in open forest spaces to increase forest cover, and thinning, pruning and weeding activities to enrich logs and carbon stocking (Khadka et al., 2012). The REDD funding has been considered as a re- source and opportunity to revive slacked international forestry funding particularly for boosting personal development activi- ties and other facilities for forestry professionals. Local Tragedies of International Interventions International agencies played crucial roles to change Nepal’s forest management for environmental conservation (Hausler, 1993; Ives & Merselli, 1989) and brought some physical progresses in mountain forestry landscapes. About 15,000 for- est user groups are formed within 20 years and have taken over responsibility of local forest protection (Kanel et al., 2012). Coverage of protected areas increased from 7 percent in 1988 to over 20 percent in 2011. Forestlands are well covered by trees in most cases (FAO, 2010). Bare land areas in the accessible forests are planted in most cases. The wood stock of communi- ty forests is increasing on average by 2 cubic meters annually (Kanel et al., 2012). Harvestable sizes of trees have been over- stocked and underutilized in many cases (Khanal, 2002). Car- bon pool has bee n enriched (FAO, 2010). P roduction and availa- bility of timber has been exceeded demand and local availabili- ty of firewood has been increased in some extent and commun- ities (Kanel et al., 2012). The user groups are also serving as legal grass root bodies to deal with external agencies or people. Local fund has been generated for forest and other community development by selling of forest products and recently carbon emission reduction service in few groups (Khadka et al., 2012). OPEN ACCESS 62
B. DHAKAL Table 2. Current PES schemes in Nepal (Sources: REDD, 2013; GON, 2012). Implementing agencies and program ICIMOD, FECOFUN and ANSAB (REDD + payment systems) Pilot test o f REDD paym ent scheme for forest carbon WWF, CARE, NTNC and FECOFUN (Hariyo Ban Program) 2 REDD scheme for biodive rsity conse rvation in f or est (Poverty alleviatio n R EDD+ pilot) 14 district s i n mid and 3 REDD scheme for poverty alleviation an biodiversity conservation in forestry FP project of Pl an Vivo REDD scheme for forest c arbon enhancement and local livelihoods s upp ort O-The Himalayan Dolakha, Bugling Rupandehi and dang REDD scheme for enhanci ng for est and community ability to adapt to climate change; and reduce livestock grazing/feeding in forest resources NIFIN, IWGIA, AIPP and IPICPRE (Clima t e Change and REDD Awareness creation about REDD benefit to Awareness to collaborative forest users Community capacity building (Programme for readiness for REDD) National REDD capacity building Recently information systems of forestry resources are greatly improved. However, the international interventions have re- sulted in many environmental, economic and social tragedies at local level. It takes a considerable period to experience both positive and negative impacts of recent international interven- tions such as Reduced Emission Deforestation and Forest De- gradation-plus (REDD). The major tragedies of all the interna- tional interventions so far experienced are as follows. Biodiversity Loss Changes in the institutions and management of community forests by external intervention affected both forest and agri- cultural biodiversity. External agencies brought industrial mod- el of forest management and advised forest users to remove naturally grown non-woody vegetation and shrub species, and replace the area by fast growing trees to enhance log production and carbon stocking. Commencing effect of conservation ac- tions most of forests are covered by tree and other aggressive species regenerated naturally and overstocked in some cases (Shrestha et al., 2010). The suppression of these products created daily need products scarcity of forest users that caused over exploitation understory resources and left barely resources for biodiversity (Shrestha & McManus, 2008). Decreasing the resources on the forest floor forced wild animals to go into agricultural lands for their feed, which increase their vulnera- bility. The habitat of common birds providing seed dispersal and pest regulation services are the bushes grown in moderately open forest conditions which have been lost. Declining tran- shumance systems reduced the weed control service of lives- tock and farmers that results in the invasion of local aggressive and exotic weeds into alpine pastureland (Kala & Shrivastava, 2004) which is little studied in Nepal. The species established in open pasture and livestock dung over many hundreds of years may have declined to extinction. Communities have still advised and funded tree planting to fill any open space left in the forest (Karky et al., 2012; Kh adka et al., 2012). The diverse forest conditions, including some open spaces (in terms of tree cover) for maintaining forest biodiversity, thus, hardly remain. Biodiversity has been also significantly degraded in reduction of human uses of forest products and services as community used forests converted into protected areas (Christensen & Heilmann, 2009). Creating a biodiversity healthy regime re- quires removing and replacing some trees which reduce carbon pool below the baseline level and affect payment in REDD forests. The government also has poor institutional capacity to afford and manage for creating healthy forest state in protected areas and other public forests. In addition, forest officials feel a risk of misusing the forests by communities and elites so resist allowing change on forest management. Therefore, the REDD forestry practices, as funded by the USAID (Table 2), rather contribute to escalating degradation of forest biodiversity evolved in open spaces created by human activities and the reduction of forest resource supplies to support agro-biodiver- sities. Change in forest management has also degraded agrobiodi- versity. Declining access to forest grazing services has reduced the population of high hill animals such as yak, decreasing 1.8 per cent annually (CBS, 2008). The animal feed in forest pas- tures for thousands of years, is economically little viable and probably biophysically unfit in stall-feeding management sys- tems. Some of the local breeds of goat and cattle could not survive well in stall feeding. According to CBS (2008), pure breeds of some livestock are extinct (e.g., Siri cattle) and others (e.g., Lulu and Achhame cattle, Lime buffalo, and Lampuchhre and Kage sheep), are threatened to extinction which were sus- tained and evolved on forest pasture and grazing for hundreds years. Forest conservation practices also reduce livestock mo- bility and the opportunities for their cross breeding between dif- ferent geographic region s, and the fertilization of farms scattered Kanchanpur, Kailali, Banke, Bardiya, Nawalparasi, Chitwan, Bara, Parsa, Rautahat Mustang, Chitwa n, Kaski, Tanahu, Manang, Lamjung, and Gorkha. 314 Districts (Rautahat, Bara, Parsa, Makawanpur, Chitwan, Nawalparasi, Rupandehi, Kapilbastu, Dang, Banke, Bardia, Kailali, Kanchanpur and Argakhachi). OPEN ACCESS 63
B. DHAKAL in different geographical areas. Crop varieties suitable in less productive and rain-fed land are disappearing from communi- ties as farm manure production or availability decreased with the restrictions on forest use for livestock production and mo- bility. The land is either abandoned for cropping or put to other uses because of decreasing farm manure supplies and increas- ing fertilizer prices (Raut et al., 2012). Loss of vegetable spe- cies susceptible to fertilizer is natural in the shortage of farm manure as it happened in England in 1960s (Robinson & Su- therland, 2002). Wate r Problem Most rural communities use spring water and experience a shortage during late winter to summer. Communities have ex- perienced declining water flow in spring and stream with in- creasing forest cover in catchments (Kanel et al., 2012). The management of community forestland is critically important for water recharge service. Scientific studies carried out in different ecological conditions clearly showed that increasing forest cover reduces downstream water flows significantly in low rainfall and summer seasons. There is little evidence that forest cover has any contribution in rainfall except the cloud forest in Latin America (Bruijnzeel, 2004). Government agencies of some developed countries, therefore, discourage forestation in drinking water catchments of scarce water supply areas. How- ever, some influential international agencies (e.g., IUCN and FAO) recommended the Nepal government to enrich forest and attain full cover to increase rainfall and water supply in criti- cally scarce areas and seasons (IUCN, 2006; FAO, 1996). Local Knowledge and Resources Loss The new forest management has affected local knowledge gained in hundreds years of practices. Community knowledge on and indigenous practices of using of forest resources de- clined under community forestry and protected area programme which reduced access to forest and availability of non-timber forest products (Pandit & Kumar, 2010). Information about the resources of alpine regions and remote areas decreased when people’s opportunities to graze alpine pasture were reduced by being blocked for grazing in warmer belt forest during winter and spring. The growth of many species valuable in sustaining local knowledge is suppressed or lost because restriction on resources uses fosters domination of aggressive plant species (Kala & Shrivastava, 2004). The decreasing use of local know- ledge and skills is making people pay high costs for market goods and services. Market goods and services at affordable prices are often not safe to use, particularly for people in dis- advantaged and remote communities. It has been too costly to make them revive of the collapsed local knowledge systems and institutions in the communities. The declining of sources of information and the supply of non-timber forest products (e.g. herbal medicines) for rural communities has, thus, aggravated the vulnerability of poor people, especially women, in disad- vantaged communities and in natural disaster conditions. Food Security Problem Forest resources were bases of food security in many com- munities. One common use of the forest resource was for lives- tock grazing and fodder supply, which contributes to food secu- rity directly by producing animal products and indirectly by producing farm manure and drought power for crop production. Donor agencies purposively and strategically advised Nepal government and funded to reduce and control livestock hold- ings of poor communities to increase forest (Hausler, 1993; Ives & Merselli, 1989). Pine and other non-fodder species were planted in community pastureland. Livestock holdings have decreased significantly as the policy was implemented (Dhakal et al., 2012). Decreasing livestock holdings reduced farm ma- nure production that reduced crop yields and escalated farm land abandonment (Raut et al., 2012; Khanal & Watanabe, 2006). The REDD programme of some of the donor agencies (e.g. the Himalayan Community Carbon Project funded by SDC, DFID and FINIDA) have designed to reduce livestock grazing and other uses of products by communities. It destroys socio-ecological systems for food security evolved and sus- tained in mountain geo-ecological condition for centuries. The food security effect of external intervention is higher in remote and high hill communities where transhumance practices of alpine regions collapsed due to restrictions on mobile animal grazing in the forests, which is essential during winter (snowing) and early spring (Dhakal et al., 2011). Loss of forage in forest also contributed on increasing incidence of wild animals on farm crops. Poor households, particularly with elderly and women, are passive victims of food scarcity. The institutional change and forest management activities for carbon trading and protected areas based biodiversity conserva- tion are done for forever. The changes create many legal com- plexities and social disputes in the use for food production ac- tivities. For example, forests of pine planted in the pasture of the poor communities have been legally restricted to change into fodder production and grazing forests. This requires a long legal battle to get approved the land use change to food produc- tion related activities and involves a huge cost and time to de- velop production and management facilities. The impact of the external interventions on food security, therefore, will be long lasting. Climate Change Adaptation Problem Mountain communities and forest can be further affected by global climate change. Forest species, structure and age com- positions are decreased in most of community forests (Shrestha et al., 2012), and more critical in donor supported districts. It requires changes on forest management practices to increase their capacities adaptive to the climate change. It requires in- creasing diversities in stand composition, structure and age of the forest to enhance resilience (Amato et al., 2011). Biodiver- sity conservation also requires creating heterogeneity in forest habitat conditions, maintaining functional diversity and reduc- ing the conversion of diverse natural forests to reduced-species (Thompson et al., 2009). It requires heavy management opera- tion and reformation of the forest to increase adaptive capacity to climate change under existing condition. The changes on forest management conflicts with the REDD policy requirement of maintaining baseline forest carbon level. After many years of study Amato et al. (2011) demonstrated clear tradeoffs between the achievement of mitigation and adaptation objectives from forest management. Contrary to the facts the international agencies (e.g. DFID, SDC and FINIDA—refer Table 2) intro- duced REDD policy for enhancing forest biodiversities and adaptive capacity of forest and communities. The REDD fore- stry practices are intended to manage the forest in an intact natural condition which promotes aggressive or in vasive species, OPEN ACCESS 64
B. DHAKAL leads forest to homogeneity condition, and reduces resources for multipurpose use. It is too early to observe the impacts of the program but it most likely increases vulnerability of both communities and ecosystems systems based on small size of forest. The agencies are also destroying traditional forestry practices and creating new institutional barriers which affect management and utilization of forest resources for adaption to climate change. The Marginalization of Poor People and Indigenous Communities Growing numbers of studies have shown that external inter- vention in common property management further marginalizes poor people. The community forest management activities in- troduced by external agencies abolished traditional systems of producing non-timber forest products and directed the promo- tion of log based forest management (Uprety et al., 2011). Log production requires a longer period and suppresses the growth of many non-timber species underneath the trees (e.g., grasses for livestock and medicinal plans for income generation) and reduces the production of stakes and poles valuable for agricul- tural. Fodder or grazing was the major means of forest benefit for many households in the old management regime (Maharjan et al., 2003) but it has decreased dramatically in most forests (Dhakal et al., 2011). The reduction in supply of non-timber products also reduced economic activity in the communities that would otherwise benefit poor households that have poor access to off-community or other high returning employment activities. Under the community forest policy, households are allowed to use logs only for home consumption, not for sale by individuals. Poor people consume much lower amounts of tim- ber because of the poorer capacity of the household to use it than rich households. Some community user groups sell the timber in markets at lower than the production cost (a loss of high opportunity benefit), which benefits the elite of urban areas at the expense of the poor people. Fifty per cent of the income from timber sales outside the community goes to Dis- trict Forest Development Fund, which has been used mostly at the district forest official’s discretion. The rest of the income goes to community funds where powerful households indirectly get the lion’s share of the benefit. Current payment for ecosystem services (PES) schemes in both forest and water sectors are not functioning in a true mar- ket mechanism. Payments are also not based on an assessment of environment outputs and economic cost/benefit. They are based on discretion, interest and the policy of the implementing agencies. For example, Makawanpur District Council receives 12 percent benefit from the hydropower company and its 20 percent goes to the communities of Kulekhani watershed PES scheme. A study reported that the total annual income for the watershed communities was RS 60,000 (about US $600) for conservation of over 62,000 ha of forest by over 9000 house- holds (Khatri, 2011). It can be imagined that the foregone bene- fit for the households from changing the community land man- agement was many folds higher. Alternative management would most probably result in a much better level of the wa- tershed conservation services. Interestingly, the households affected from the PES program, however, are silent against their marginalization which is a common case in community level work due to elites’ pressure. Some policy analysts (e.g. Strassburge et al., 2012) suggest that poor people should leave their forest use to get out of the poverty trap. However, Lam and Paul (2013) study showed that people displaced from the forest conservation suffered due to isolation from their original communities. The declaration of Langtang National Park in Nepal, for instance, reduced local people’s access to subsistence forest resources and forced them to find alternative ways of life. Many young girls from the park-affected communities migrated to India and became in- volved in prostitution because they possessed very low levels of educational, financial and social capital to find other better ways of life. The effects of the external interventions are great- er on indigenous ethnic groups that traditionally depended more on multipurpose forest resources and held smaller sized pro- ductive private land than other ethnic groups (Vinding & Kampbel, 2012). Another affected group is women, who take responsibility of households and bear the burden of forest re- source scarcity and resultant misery much more than men in the communities. People in forest development support organizations, interna- tional aid agencies and profession have talked much about in- clusive development and forestry governance and related to current affaire of political institutional development. In practice they have contributed in developing the institutions which have reduce access to and control over the local forest resources. Property Rights and Development Barriers According to Census 2011, the population growth is negative in 31 out of 75 districts in the country. It has highly increased in other districts and this puts excessive pressure on the envi- ronment. The districts with negative population growth have low economic activity and excessive uses of forest resources for conservation. One growing challenge of development is to balance the pressure on environmental resources by managing the population. Rural households cannot manage their way of life on less than 0.5 ha alone because of the changing way of life, which needs income to afford food and development ser- vices. Appropriate management of the forest resources could increase means of livelihoods and provide incentives to live in their original communities. Studies have shown that many community forests still have adequate capacity to produce for- est products and services and keep people employed under alternative managements (Dhakal et al., 2007). However, the community pasturelands converted into pine forest under the external advices and supports (financial and technical), for instance, now cannot be managed for fodder production and poverty alleviation because of growing legal and social complexities (Dhakal et al., 2011). Local people have lost their de facto property rights on and access to the forests developed in protected areas. The people have been displaced from their centuries old living place (Vinding & Kampbel, 2012). It is not only national law but also interna- tional law hinders in changing the management of the forests used in protected areas into community oriented management. Moreover, both rich and poor nations are going to be bounded in managing public forests for enhancing carbon sink and tack- ling global climate change under new phase of the international policy (The REDD Desk, 2012). The policy will further con- strain the poor communities to manage their forests currently under REDD for other local uses and benefits. The forestry institutions and forest management induced by external inter- vention create many complex problems. They are highly likely OPEN ACCESS 65
B. DHAKAL to be too costly to reform in future. In essence the forestlands are being locked which creates barriers for other activities of economic development. Abuses on Local Communities, Civil Societies and Institutions Almost all forestry development agencies have cited socioe- conomic problems of local communities to justify rational of their programme activities, and get funding and working ap- provals. They used poor households in forest protection and conservation programmes but provided little remuneration. They used social pressures (e.g. use environmental media propaganda and approach through local elites) to influence ordinary people and manage the forest resources for achieving best interests and benefit of the external agencies. Most of the agencies know the negative impacts of their interventions on policies and supports at communities through research reports and community work experiences but they have continued funding and implementing further regressive programmes (e.g., the current REDD forestry programme, the multi-stakeholders project and the new protected area development programme) with repeating the false promises of benefiting the poor com- munities. The alternative forest management practices proven to benefit local people and environmental are little practiced. The agencies advised and funded to manage the community forest for increasing timber supplies of urban users and offset- ting carbon produced by affluent societies. They did even risky and unethical experimentation of the REDD policy on forests that are the sources of the livelihoods means of barely surviving poor people. The policy influenced communities’ decisions and dictated forest management rules for restricting collection of the daily needed forest products and services and for planting trees in the remaining forest spaces used in producing daily needed non-timber products(Uprety et al., 2011; Khadka, 2012). Traditional farming practices (e.g., shifting cultivation and collection of woody green products and fodder including lives- tock grazing of the tribal groups and other communities have been officially declared a criminal practice. The restrictions on uses of forest products and services to sustain livelihoods com- pel many households to abandon their business and farm, and in some cases, leave the community for good. The forest based people are blamed for encroaching on environmentally sensi- tive land and using forest resources (Rasul & Thapa, 2003) but it is ignored the fact that the territories of the indigenous people are encroached by government policies and activities of other societies; and the communities are squeezed in marginal lands, and forced them to grow crop in sensitive lands and shorter rotation. The agencies have, therefore, disrespected and chal- lenged livelihoods and way of lives indigenous people barely living on the forest resources. International aid and support agencies have also impaired the advocatory capability and position of civilian societies (NGOs, forest user groups and other organizations) on forestry issues. The Federation of Community Forestry User Group Nepal (FECOFUN), for instance, a body assumed to represent the interests and act to safeguard the interests and wills of commu- nity forest users, has been influenced and used in businesses by donors and other agencies from its establishment. Its constitu- tion was prepared by representative of donor agencies and has directed the FECOFUN to contributing to the conservation of community forest rather than representing and safeguarding the interests and wills of community forest user groups. In addition, from the beginning it has intensively worked in the guidance and business of donor and other external agencies and mediated and influenced by the agencies to such a degree that its mem- bers cannot express strong disagreement on any issue on the policy or programme of donors even if they know these are against forest communities. External agencies have involved FECOFUN, for example, directly in the REDD project, which contains many policies and activities highly contrary or con- flicting to resource rights and livelihoods of forest users. The external agencies, therefore, involved FECOFUN in project implementation with the objective of neutralizing potential confrontational position of forest user groups and escaping from the blame of any wrong doing. This is an abuse of com- munity institution to manage the local forest resources for meeting interest of the international agencies. The disadvantaged households are forced to co-operate the forestry programmes of vested agencies. Instead of voicing against inappropriate forest management and their marginaliza- tion, the victims say that they do not want to be barriers of de- velopment and innovation, and place them odd in community. Rather they are compelled to co-operate (Shrestha & McManus, 2008). They are in fact trapped in the “value of forest develop- ment and innovation” tactically socially constructed by national and international elites. This situation can be termed as an op- pressed state of the people. Some new generations of the victim people may understand the abuses and oppressive actions of the external agencies. They may have contemptuous against the people working in the agencies, and ego feelings to take re- venge. But compounding of legal and social complexities leaves them little room to bring the justice. The Problem in International Forestry Policy: A Kaleidoscopic Case The inappropriate international intervention is not typically limited to Nepal. but also find in other developing countries. For example, Community Forestry International (a California based INGO run by the US university professors) has advised and prepared a REDD project in Khasi tribal communities, a vulnerable social group in India (Project Idea Note, 2011). The project is funded by the USAID and certified by Plan Vivo Foundation (a Scottish-based INGO). The tribal community has eighty-five percent land areas under forest. Its private land- holding size is average 0.25 ha per household which is insuffi- cient to produce enough food for family consumption alone. The funding and supporting agencies have planned and prac- ticed to replace local fodder based livestock (cattle) system by imported grain based livestock (poultry and pig) system. Ac- cording to the REDD project agreement the community people must comply that “(iii) Cattle if reared, should be of superior breed and stall-fed with cattle feed procured from outside” (Project Idea Note, 2011: p. 16). In advising the communities and funding in the project, the resourceful agencies have ig- nored potential socioeconomic problems of the vulnerable com- munities and risk of losing socio-ecological systems and ser- vices (e.g. forest resource based agrobiodiversity) evolved and sustained hundreds of year of community civilization. It is very interesting about saliency of high profiled and knowledgeable international agencies (e.g. FAO, UNEA and CIFOR) which could effectively communicate the critical problems in interna- tional level and influence on international policy decisions. The OPEN ACCESS 66
B. DHAKAL agencies, for example FAO and RECOFT rather recognize the above work as an innovation (Vicker et al., 2012). The international policy problem can be considered a kalei- doscopic case and explained by multiple schools of thought. Some schools of thought are as follows. a) Proponents of the western hegemony school of thought argue that most of the western values and practices are in- compatible with conditions and needs of forest based com- munities in developing countries, and in many cases envi- ronmentally unsustainable or unfriendly. However, interna- tional policies and practices of forestry are founded on the western world’s institutions, values, social preferences and practices which are routed through education of forestry professionals or decision makers, the origin place of devel- opment support organizations, main source of funding, languages, people’s expertise and pro-western preference in influential job positions. The values, ideas and practices of the non- western world are filtered and suppressed through different institutional routes. People with challenging views are excluded in opportunities and supporters of western values and views are rewarded. The pervasiveness of the western hegemony has made national professionals power- less to understand and protect th e quality of local i nstitutions and practices and real needs of disadvantaged citizen. Therefore forestry resources traditionally managed for local environment and socioeconomic benefits are hampered by increasing western influences in developing countries. b) Scholars of the institutional school of thought argue that the community unfriendly activities and marginalization are outcomes of bad governance and weak institutions of the government of host countries. Many invisible hands in- volved in working on international policies and influencing decisions in their own favour. Under the financial and symbolic (political and language) influences of aid agencies the governments in developing countries recognize any ca- pacity level of people from developed countries as experts, and allowed to be influential in p olicy and other management decisions. The developing countries are favorite working destinations for the people particularly with poor technical capacity, learners or interest in relaxed lives of developing countries. The experts mostly provide poor quality of tech- nical services. If international aid agencies hire any expert from developing countries they hire to the people who have characteristics of working in their interest and benefits in- stead of host countries. Due to weak institutional capacity the governments of developing countries could not defend against the wrong doing and protect national interest and local needs. c) The proponents of the behavioral school of thought argue that explaining the emerging local probl ems of forestry is the professional areas of expertise and responsibility of forest scientists, academicians, practitioners and related environ- mentalists. Now the professional people have not have worked scientifically and played their professional roles because of over-influences of environment media and ac- tivists of global environmental issue. Many of them have benefited from working in the interest and benefit of po- werful societies or countries or on global issue. The others have lost their constructive thinking and scientific visioning abilities in relation to local community needs and broader environmental problems. The wrong doings of the people have been little challenged by other professional groups, civil societies and intellectuals because of technical com- plexities in environmental issues. Local communities have been victim of the bad professional services or roles of the people influential on forestry decision making. d) Proponents of the neocolonial school of thought argue that developed countries, purposely and strategically introduced the new forestry institutions and management practices to lock the forestland resources used in food production and destroy livestock farming in developing countries. The de- veloped countries have influenced forest policies in devel- oping countries various ways such as offering funds on the forestry programs of their interest, influencing international environment conservation policies, employing their people at influential level in international organizations and using diplomatic pressures. The restriction on land uses in devel- oping countries increases future market of agricultural products for developed countries which have hold vastly privatized lands and well developed agricultural technolo- gies and institutions. This land use strategy provides the developed countries opportunities to balance import of in- dustrial products from developing countries as well as in- fluence on world development policy by controlling food. The control on the uses of forests and the production of li- vestock in the poor communities also reduces global greenhouse gas emission, which would relieve the pressure on emission intensive businesses in the developed countries. e) The argument of proponents of the gangster (mafiasm) school of thought differs from the proponents of the neoco- lonial school of thought. According to the school of thought, an influential “gang” of business people (called think tanks, academicians, experts and consultants) have socially tacti- cally constructed the forest policies and values in the world, and sold to influential political actors including governments in developed countries who are de sperate of ideas and polic y solutions to cool down public outcry for environmental management in home, and keep their symbolic and political existence in overseas. The mafia developed the ideas and constructed new social values on forest to maximize their own benefit. They do little care negative impacts to so cieti es and environment. Same natures of people find in other all over the world and most of them have got opportunity to work and influence in policies and practices at international, regional, national and local levels. The followers of the mastermind gang have propagated and implemented the forest policies ideas twisted interpretation of real forestry phenomena and practices, and are paid by developed coun- tries. Other people hopped on their bandwagon. The forests are managed according to the strategies of the mafia group and poor communities became victim of the management. Most probably all of the fa ctors can have played some roles on the emerging problems of forestry policies and practices in developing countries but at different degrees. Conclusion The purpose of this study is to explain whether international interventions and supports on forest management in developing countries result in positive socioeconomic and environmental outcomes at local communities. The finding shows that interna- tional interventions to manage developing countries’ forests for global environmental conservation can make over-influence on forestry policies and practices and spoil indigenous locally OPEN ACCESS 67
B. DHAKAL adaptable forestry systems evolved and practiced in hundreds of years. The forestry institutions and management practices oriented for global environmental interest result in tradeoffs of production of other environmental services mostly of local importance. They are more likely to lock opportunities of mul- tipurpose management and uses of the forest, worsened water yield, reduced local food security and local knowledge, and hampered local economic activities. The management can also reduce habitat diversities for forest based species and resource supplies for sustaining agro-biodiversities. Poor people are also most likely to be suffered when community forests are ma- naged for global interest, particularly extreme environmental conservation purpose such as offsetting greenhouse gas emis- sion and protected area based biodiversity conservation. The international interventions can also make local forestry institu- tions and practices too costly to change for improving benefit level to the forest based communities and local environmental sys tems. The interventions lock local forest resources and in- stitutions in the position to benefit distance users for long term. The findings reveal that the supports of international forestry agencies can benefit global or powerful societies. However, the agencies are less likely to work for the benefit of local commu- nity and environment. They care little about the strategic de- velopment position of institutionally weak countries. Interestingly, the policy interventions and technical supports of international agencies are found technically wrong or poorly based on science, though forestry professionals, environmental policy analysts and academicians of high profile organizations are involved in the policy formation and implementation processes. The work benefitted national elites and other dis- tance users (urban households in the country and affluent socie- ties in overseas) at the expenses of poor communities and local environment. The forestry case reveals that many people work- ing in high profile international organizations are not trust- worthy or have poor level of professional ethic. The forestry problems have been almost impossible to be re- solved particularly working at the initiation of community be- cause they reached to a very complex level. Furthermore, it has been an international strategy to continue the locally bad forest policies and practices for international benefit. National level forest policy decisions are controlled or influenced by conserv- ative and corrupt forestry people. Influential international agen- cies have provided incentive to national elites in promoting the policies and practices. Awareness also works little to alleviate the problem because the aid agencies and influential people in forestry profession are well aware that their actions further marginalized poor communities and degraded local environ- ment. A social movement of like-minded people at both inter- national and national levels, however, may make some changes. Triggering of such movement requires breeding of a heinous feeling with a significant numbers of people working in fore- stry -related profession with the sense that they deceived local communities and worked against local environment and the poor people in order to address interest of affluent society and other distant users. Acknowledgemen ts Most international organizations (e.g. World Bank, FAO, ICIMOD, SDC, DFID, USAID, NORAD, IUCN, WWF and FINIDA) have claimed that they have advocated, advised and funded the government and civil societies to change forest management policy and practices for improving local environ- ment, promoting sustainable local practices for mountain de- velopment and benefiting socially disadvantaged communities. However, their interventions have made the rural poor and local environment worse. The effects of the problems are pervasive and critical in both short and long terms. The influential agen- cies have ignored the issues and rather promoted further worse policies and practices. The communities have been fooled, de- ceived, oppressed and exploited by national professional elites and international agencies under the veil of forest development and environment conservation. The issues are poorly explained and shared in popular open access literatures. The fact moti- vated author in explaining and sharing the realities. He would also like to thank Dr Narendra Chanda, Department of Forest Nepal, for providing data about REDD program. REFERENCES Amato, A., Bradford, J., Fraver, S., & Palik, B. (2011). Forest man- agement for mitigation and adaptation to climate change: Insights from long-term silviculture experiments. Forest Ecology and Man- agement, 262, 803-816. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.05.014 Basnet, K. (2003). Transboundary biodiversity conservation initiative: An example from Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 17, 205- 226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J091v17n01_12 Bruijnzeel, L. (2004). Hydrological functions of tropical forests: Not seeing the soil for the trees? Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environ- ment, 104, 185-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2004.01.015 CBS (2008). Environmental Statistics of Nepal 2008. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of Statistics. CBS (2011). Preliminary results of National Population Census 2011. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of Statistics. Christensen, M., & Heilmann, J. (2009). Forest biodiversity gradients and the human impact in An napurna Conservation Area, Nepal . Bio- diversity and Conservation, 18, 2205-2221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9583-9 Dhakal, B., Bigsby H., & Cullen, R. (2012). Socioecono mic impacts of public forest policies on heterogeneous agricultural households. En- vironmental and Resource Economics, 53, 73-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10640-012-9548-4 Dhakal, B., Bigsby, H ., & Cullen, R. (2007). The link b etween co mmu- nity forestry policies, and poverty and une mployment in rural Nepal. Mountain Research & Development, 27, 32-39. Dhakal, B., Bigsby, H., & Cullen, R. (2011). Forests for food security and livelihood sustainability: Policy problems and opportunities for small farmers in Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 35, 86- 115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2011.530903 Dong, S., Lassoie, J., Yan, Z., Sharma, E., Shrestha, K., & Pariyar, D. (2007). Indigenous rangeland resource management in the moun- tainous areas of northern Nepal: A case s tudy from the Rasuwa Dis- trict. The Rangeland Journal, 29, 149-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/RJ07033 Douglas, J., & Simula, M. (2010). The future of the world’s forests: Ideas vs ideologies. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9582-4 Eckholm, E. (1975). The deterioratio n of mountain environ ments. Eco- logical stress in the highlands of Asia, Latin America, and Africa takes a mounting social toll. Science, 189, 764-770. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.189.4205.764 Edmonds, E. (2003). Development assistance and the construction of government-initiated community institutions. Economic Develop- ment and Cultural Change, 51, 897-930. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/377160 FAO (1996). Shivapuri management plan: Technical recommendations and policy design for the protection and development of the Shiva pu- ri Areas including the Participatory Management of Shivapuri Re- sources (G CP/NEP/048/NOR) K athmandu. Rome: FAO. OPEN ACCESS 68
B. DHAKAL FAO (2010). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010—Nepal. Country Repor t, Ro me: FAO. Folke, C., Colding, J., & Berkes, F. (2003). Synthesis: Building resi- lience and adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems. In: F. Berkes, J. Colding, & C. Folke (Eds.), Navigating social-ecological systems (pp. 352-387). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gartaula, H.N., Visser, L., & Niehof, A. (2012). Socio-cultural disp osi- tions and wellbeing of the women left behind: A case of migrant households in Nepal. Social Indicators Research, 108, 401-420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9883-9 GON (2012). REDD+ in Nepal: A brief introduction. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal Ministry of Forests & Soil Conservation REDD-Forestry and Climate Change Cell. Harrop, S.R. (2007). Traditional agricultural landscapes as protected areas in international law and p olicy. Agriculture, Ecosys tems & En- vironment, 121, 296-307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.020 Hobley, M. (1996). Participatory forestry: The process of change in India and Nepal. Londo: Rural Development Forestry Network, Overseas Development Institute. Hrabovszky, J., & Miyan, K. (1987). Pop ulation growth and lan d use in Nepal “The Great Turnabout”. Mountain Research and Development, 7, 364-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3673203 IUCN (2006). Policy brief 3: The costs and benefits of conserving Shivapuri National Park Catchment, Nepal. Colombo: IUCN. Ives, J., & Messerli, B. (1989). The Himalayan dilemma reconciling development and conservation. London & New York: The United Nations University and Routledge. Kala, C., & Shrivas tava, R. (2004). Successional changes in Hi malayan Alpine Vegetation: Two decades after removal of livestock grazing. Weed Technology, 18, 1210-1212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/0890-037X(2004)018[1210:SCIHAV]2.0.C O;2 Kanel, K., Shrestha, K., Tu ladhar, A., & Reg mi, M. (2012). A study on the demand and supply of wood products in different regions of Nep- al. Kathmandu: REDD—Forestry Climate Change Cell Babarmahal. Kapos, V., et al. (2012). Impacts of forest and land management on biodiversity and carbon. In J. A. Parrotta, C. Wildburger, & S. Man- sourian (Eds.), Understanding relationships between biodiversity, carbon, forests and peop le: The key to achieving REDD+ objectives (pp. 53-80). A Global Asses sment Report, IUFRO Worl d Series Vol 31, Vienna: IUFRO. Karky, B. S., Karki, S., Rana, E. B., & Kotru, R. (2012). Innovative intervention and strateg ies in Nepal for implemen ting REDD+ at th e community level. Redefining Paradig ms of Sustainable Develop ment in South Asia, SDPI and SDC. Karsenty, A., & Ongolo, S. (2011). Can “fragile states” decide to re- duce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of in- centives with respect to the REDD mechanism. Forest Policy and Economics, 18, 38-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.05.006 Khadka, M., Karki, S., & Chapagain, A. (2012). Gender consideration in the REDD+ payment piloting in Nepal: Maintaining or challeng- ing unequal gender power relations? The Bhutan+10 International Conference on Gender and Sustainable Mountain Development in a Changing World, Thimphu, 15-19 October 2012. Khanal, K. (2002). Under utilization in co mmunity forest management: A case study from Lalitpur District. Banko Janakari, 12, 26-32. Khanal, N., & Watanabe, T. (2006). Abandonment of a gricultural land and its consequences: A case study in th e Sikles Area, Gan dak i Bas in, Nepal Himalaya. Mountain Research and Development, 26, 32-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1659/0276-4741(2006)026[0032:AOALAI]2.0.C O;2 Kharel, et al. (2005). Performance characteristics of the yak in Nepal and its crosses with mountain cattle. http://agtr.ilri.cgiar.org/Casestudy/yak/Yak.htm Khatri, D. B. (2011). Payments for ecosystem services in Kulekhani Watershed of Nepal: An institutional analysis of mechanisms for sharing hydroelectricity revenue. 13th International Association of Study of Commons Conference at Hyderabad, Hyderabad, 10-14 January 2011, 1-60. Lam, L.M., & Paul, S. (2013). Displacement and erosion of informal risk-sharing: Evidence from Nepal. World Development, in Press. MPFS (1988). Master Plan for th e F or estry S ecto r Nep a l (MPFS) M ain Report Ministry of Forests a nd Soil Conservation. Kathmandu: Gov- ernment of Nepal. Pandit, B., & Kumar, C. (2010). Factors influencing the integration of non-timber forest products into field crop cultivation: A case study from eastern Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Forest r y, 29, 671-695. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10549811003741599 Phelps, J., Friess, D. A., & Webb, E. L. (2012). Win-win REDD+ ap- proaches belie carbon-biodiversity trade-offs. Biological Conserva- tion, 154, 53-60. Project Idea Note (PIN) (2011). Project idea note for the Umiam Sub-watershed REDD+ Project. East Khas i Hills Distric t Meghala ya, India. Plan Vivo. http://www.planvivo.org/wp-content/uploads/Khasi-Hills-Communit y-REDD-ProjectIdeanote-May13EM.pdf Rasul, G., & Thapa, G. B. (2003). Shifting Cultivation in the Mountains of South and So utheast Asia: Regional Patterns and F actors Influen- cing the Change. Land Degradation & Development, 14, 495-508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ldr.570 Raut, N., & Sitaula, B. K. (2012). Assessment of fertilizer policy, far- mers’ perceptions and implications for future agricultural develop- ment in Nepal. Sustainable Agriculture Research, 1, 188-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/sar.v1n2p188 Robinson, R., & Sutherland, W. (2002). Post-war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain. Journal of Applied Ecolo- gy, 39, 157-176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2002.00695.x Rokaya, M, Münzbergová, Z., & Timsina, B. (2010). Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants from the Humla district of western Nepal. Journal of Ethno pharmacology, 185, 485-504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2010.05.036 Shrestha, K., & McManus P. (2008). The politics of co mmunity partic- ipation in natural resource management: Lessons from community forestry in Nepal. Australian Forestry, 71, 135-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00049158.2008.10676280 Shrestha, U., Shrestha, B., & Shrestha, S. (2010). Biodiversity conser- vation in community forests of Nepal: Rhetoric and reality. Interna- tional Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation, 2, 98-104 Strassburg, B., et al. (2012). Social and economic considerations rele- vant to REDD+. In J. Parrotta, C. Wildburger, & S. Mansourian (Eds.), Understanding relationships between biodiversity, carbon, forests and people: The key to achieving REDD+ objectives. A Global Assessment Report, IUFRO World Series Vol.31, Vienna: IUFRO. Thompson, I. , Mackey, B., McNulty, S ., & Mosseler, A. (2009). Forest Resilience, Biodiversity, and Clima te Change. A synthesis of the bio- diversity/resilience/stability relationship in forest ecosystems. Tech- nical Series No. 4 3, Montreal: Sec retariat of the Convention on Bio- logical Diversity. Uprety, D., Lu itel, H., & Bhandari, K. (2011). REDD+ and conflict: A case study of the REDD + p ro jects in Nep al. Kathmandu: The Center for People and Forest (RECOFTC) and ForestAction Nepal. Vicker, B., Trines, E. , & Pohnan, E. (2012). Community guid elines for assessing forestry volunteer carbon market. Bangkok: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Regional Office for Asia and The Pacific. Vinding, D., & Kampbel, E. (2012). Indigenous women workers: With case studies from Bangladesh, Nepal and the Americas. Geneva: In- ternational Labour Organization. OPEN ACCESS 69
|