i

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Common property refers to some form of shared resource tenure usually

involving a group or a specific community that uses and manage the resources.

Common property resources constitute all such resources, which are meant for

common use of the villagers without any individual ownership right (Jodha, 1986).

Forest, pastureland, fishery, and irrigation canal are some of the examples Common

property (CP). Common Property Resource (CPR) is known as common pool

resources in terms of economics. The system or the Common Property (CP) managed

by the local communities or the certain group as indigenously managed properties in

the common form of managing systems, where the institution runs on the mutual

understanding as the community’s and passive the conflicts. Natural resources, land,

forests and water, provide important cultural and religious symbols for the indigenous

peoples of Nepal like the Rais and Sherpas (Sherpa et.al 2009). Ostrum (1992) has

developed the ‘institutional design principles’ of long enduring self organized

irrigation system on the basis of empirical evidences. Common-pool resources (CPRs)

are resources to which more than one individual has access, but where each person’s

consumption reduces the availability of the resource to others. Important examples

include fish stocks, pastures, and woods, as well as water for drinking or irrigation.

On a grander scale, air and the oceans are common pools (Ostrum, 1992).

The impact of policies on community involvement in common property

resources is hard to assess, as these reforms are still not being implemented. Thus, the

concept of community justice can be seen as a practice of justice within the

community to tranquil the problem of a particular community. The concept of

 2

community justice and the state justice practice draw distinct boundaries between the

role of the state and the role of communities in the justice process. Community justice

from the perspective of equity, the fair distribution of Natural Resources (NR) and the

distribution of resources, rights, opportunities and wealth among people and over

time. The inclusion in decision making of those most affected by the proposed

development intervention should be seen as social justice (Agrawal, 2001). The

livelihood of the Community depends upon the harvesting of Natural resources while

the equity sharing in Natural Resources (NR) is just becomes a major issue. Many

developing countries obtain a large share of their income from the harvesting of

Common property or access renewable natural resources, including fisheries, forests,

grazing grounds and water resources (Lopez, 2010)

Forests are the largest natural resources of Nepal, in terms of land area

coverage. Forest managed by the community, generally Community Forest

Management (CFM) refers to community-based activities, which are geared towards

the sustainable use of forest. The products of forest are mainly of two types: timber

and non-timber, the product benefit is being shared within the User Groups (UG) in

the case of Community Forest (CF). Mechanism of distribution of such products are

not fair and justice able. The forest product and its distribution observe the serious

disparity in distributing benefits as the local elite solely controls the distribution

system (Timalsina , 2003). The mechanics of forest product distribution and the

community justice are interrelated issues, and the impact is mainly on the sustainable

development and poverty alleviation.

The community forestry approach used to be defined and interpreted in Nepal

until late 70s, suggests that community forestry implies 'community-resource'

relations, commonly known as 'indigenous system of forest management' ( Fisher,

 3

1989), which was widespread in Nepal's hills. During 80s and beginning of 90s,

nevertheless community forestry was further conceptualized and internalized, the new

policy framework was crafted (MoFSC, 1988), legal instruments have been in place

(MoFSC, 1995), various processes, methods and tools have been developed,

modified, re-modified and experience gained. During this period, community forestry

was understood and recognized as government's priority program, for which the role

of forest bureaucracy in the hills changed from policing to facilitating leading to the

evolution of community-resource relations towards a triangular interface among

community, resource and government bureaucracy. Community forestry approach in

essence adopts participatory exercise since its inception right from the constitution of

the forest user groups. Such practice is adopted during the development of the

constitution and the community forestry work plans. In user groups that adopt

participatory democratic approaches minor conflicts and differences have been

reducing. Community forestry is established as a means to sustainable forest

management (World Bank, 2003, cited in Kanal et.al. 2004).

The contributions of these legal systems were positive for the management of

the forest and beneficial to the communities. The state legally recognized in the

communities as user groups and the community forest system in 1993. It is legalized

on the Forest Act 1993 and Forest Regulation 1995 (MoFSC, 1995). In Nepal, we

have long experience of customary practice and at least 15 years statutory exercise

about the CF. The foundation of the recent concept and model of the CF process

depends on the local customs of the villagers. These customs have been developed by

the community to manage the forest and fulfil their basic needs on forest products.

The present form of Nepal's community forestry is guided by the Forest Act of 1993,

Forest Regulations of 1995, and the Operational Guidelines of 1995. These legal
 4

instruments have legitimized the concept of Community Forest User Group (CFUG)

as an independent, autonomous and self-governing institution responsible to protect,

manage and use any patch of national forest with a defined forest boundary and user

group members. CFUGs are to be formed democratically and registered at the District

Forest Office (DFO), with CFUG Constitution, which defines the rights of the users to

a particular forest.

The system of the Community Forest was developed by local communities for

the livelihood of the present generation and prosperity of the future generation in

Nepal. This system was followed by the indigenous or customary practices of the

community from the ancient period. Local communities initiate continuously to

manage their forest as a common property.

1.2 Statement of the problem

The process of community forestry development was legally recognized in

Nepal almost a decade ago. In these ten years, the Community Forest User Groups

and stakeholders involved in the development of community forestry in Nepal have

gathered plenty of experience (Pokheral, 2001). The processes of community forestry

not only enable the people to manage the forest, natural environment and biodiversity,

they also prepare them to exercise social inclusion and democratic governance in the

local communities. The major issues incorporated during study in sustainable

management of the Community forestry are necessary to know its impacts in the

livelihood. Similarly, how the national and local level policy in the management of

CPRs is being practiced to slow the conflicts and the distribution of resources is in the

sense of social justice is the main problem arises in this research. The research deals

with some questions as follows.

 5

1. What relation exists between policies and practices to achieve the social

justice?

2. How has forest resource distribution system linked the locality?

3. Whether the community forestry is sustaining the livelihood of the

community? How?

1.3 Rationale of the Study

Common property resources (CPR) as a source of sustainable rural income.

The well-managed and systematic distribution of the resourse is the ultimate goal to

achieve social justice. The proposed topic is worth to be studied because it helps to

review the policy and the advocacy of social justice, which is a vital norm to maintain

a healthy practice in the management of CPRs. The study helps to know how the

national level policy is running by the people’s participation of community property

resources management (CPRM). However, unfair social justice invites conflict in the

community thus the study is significant to know how the recourse and power in

common property is being distributed.

1.4 Purpose of the study

The general purpose of the research is to examine the policy and practice in

common property resources and how the resources are being distributed in the CFUG.

However, the specific purpose are:

1. To examine the socioeconomic impact of forest resources on user groups

2. To analyze the local forest resources distribution policy and

3. To analyze the existing policies and local practices.

 6

CHAPTER 2

LITRATURE REVIEW

The study on community forestry is not new in the present academic sphere.

Many government officials, NGOs, INGOs, researchers and higher level student have

undertaken the study on community forestry in Nepal. Similarly, at present many

analytical studies on community forestry have been undertaken in different parts of

the world. In case of Nepal, there are a number of studies on community forest

published in various books, documents, journals and documents of international

organization, Ministry of Forestry, community forestry programme etc. But, the

studies on policy and practices on resources uses of community Forestry regarding as

a common property rights is a current leading issue to undertake this study. Some of

the literatures in policy and practices including community forestry and common

property resources are fallows.

2.1 Sociological Engagement on Forest Policy

Natural resources, like land, forests and water, provide important cultural and

religious symbols for the peoples of Nepal. Forest is an integral part of the farming

system in Nepal as farmers require access to forest products such as leafy biomass for

fodder and animal bedding, fuel wood for energy, and timber for building and

agricultural implementation. Farmers have important relationship with forest.

Daniggelis, (1997) states that- ‘Farmers’ symbolic relationship with the forest is laden

with cultural meanings and woven into their oral tradition and are used to describe the

cosmological system. Among the indigenous communities of Tamang, Limbu, Rai

owned their forests in early times. However, the Forest Act of 1993, this ownership

has been transferred to the government; it became the main cause of deprivation of

Natural resources of that community. Forests are linked to the livelihoods of people in
 7

Nepal and other developing countries. The policies and practices offered in the

community are only able to support the local livelihood but not in a sustainable

manner. In the present time issues on mitigating climate change, reducing the

incidence of poverty, bolstering local livelihoods, and supporting other biodiversity

conservation and ecosystem services. Most of the literatures value Community

forestry as the source of income for elite and politically active groups however

marginal groups heavily depend on the forest resources for their livelihoods. The

concept of preservation of Forest resources along with the development of community

are the turning point in the field of community forestry resource use and distribution.

Therefore, the policies are being amended and implemented according to the people’s

centered perspective in these days. By the way, the issue of the management of forests

in the country with some policy device was given attention only towards the

beginning of the 20th century. The forest policy in Nepal, from the way it has evolved

over time, can be divided into three broad groups, via: privatization (pre-1950),

nationalization (1957 and up to the mid-1970s) and community oriented forestry

began in the late 1970s with the introduction of the community forestry concept

(Hobley, 1996).

2.2 Forest Policy in Nepal

Before 1950s no such distinct policies were implemented but conservation of

forest and its resources were seemed to be considered as the directives of kings and

state. Some of the examples- two early codes, which influenced the later codes, where

the regulations of King Mahendra Malla (1560-74) in Kathmandu valley, and the code

promulgated by King Ram Shah (1606-33) in Gorkha (a district in west Nepal). The

first stated, "For lamps, torches and wicks go to the forests and use devadaru (pine

wood)". The latter, Ram Shah, emphasized the production of forest products for
 8

subsistence need, maintaining pastureland, and developing trees along the paths and

water sources.

The commercial interests of the government started along with the unification

of the larger kingdom of Nepal. The founder king of unified Nepal, Prithvi Narayan

Shah (1742-1775) expressed in one of his directives, "Send our herbs to foreign

countries and bring back money."Between 1950-1980s, the policy between this period

is known by externally influenced policies. External forces influenced Nepal's forest

policy in the early 1950s. Nepal enacted the Private Forest Nationalization Act 1957

in order to consolidate forest ownership under the government. As there was little

experience in forest management in Nepal and all Nepali forestry professionals were

trained in India, policy for this period is greatly influenced by the laws and programs

of Indian Forestry.

Later, the Forest Act 1961 was enacted as the basis for sustained yield

management, which was then the guiding principle of forest management. By early

1980s the main changes from the earlier policies were attempts to realize people's

participation in forest management, and clearly articulated long-term goals.

Implementation was through amendments to forest acts, and the introduction of forest

of laws for community forestry. Nepal government (1988) developed a forestry sector

master plan, and identified six main and six supporting programs for the development

of the forestry sector in Nepal. A program consisting of medicinal and aromatic plants

and other minor forest products - lokta (Daphne), pine resin, sal seed, katha and sabai

grass, and bamboos and canes - is one of the six main programs. The master plan

prescribed some plans for the development of these species, all more or less industry

oriented products. In subsequent actions, as part of the infrastructure development for

implementing the forestry sector master plan, The Government (1993) brought into
 9

effect new forest laws and bylaws. Since, the new legislation categorized NTFPs into

eight classes: roots (43 species), timber bark (20 species), leaves (31 species), flower

and pulp (24 species), fruit and seeds (65 species), plants (12 species), gum resin and

latex (10 species), and herbs (29 species).

2.3 Empirical Studies of Community Forestry in Nepal

Adhikari (2003) studies on the "properties rights and natural resource: Socio-

economic heterogeneity and distributional implications of common property resource

management". On his research he assures the community management of local natural

resources has become an integral part of sustainable development. He found that- the

relationship between household socioeconomic characteristics and income from CF S

in order to investigate whether granting property rights of forests in Nepal to local

communities has enhanced the access of poorer households to the local commons. His

research compared income from CF that access to poor and non-poor households. The

results clearly show differences in gross income derived from households in different

income classes. Poorer households in forest dependent communities obtain much less

value from community forests than middle income and rich households. The average

Poor households obtain NRs.7756 from CF annually, while the richest households

obtain in average NRs.24466 per year from the community forests. Thus, in terms of

absolute contribution to the total household income, community forests contribute

more to less poor households compared to the poor.

In his study, Adhikari found that the average 85% of Common Property

Resources related the income accruing to rich households is from collecting of

livestock related forest product. Since this study could not compare pre and post

impact of CFs on household income, further comparative study of this issue may help

understanding the complexity involved in poverty, inequality and distributive

 10

consequences of regulated forms of CPR regime. One important fact that there may

be a risk that community forest will focus on long-term accumulation of timber and

ecological service values in order to meet the need of rural elites, whereas this might

reduce opportunities available for the poor.

This study suggests that household and community characteristics and

respective management regimes need to be carefully considered when handing over

the forests from government ownership to community management.

Khatri-Chhetri (2006) studies showed the importance of local institutions in

forest resource management and forest management. Equity and the equitable sharing

of power among and between government, user groups and other stakeholders in a

community is being the major issue in the justice practice of the common property

regime.

Timsina and Luitel (2003) argued that-the contexts and processes of natural

resource management have led to the mixed results in terms benefit sharing between

different groups in the community. Depending upon the socioeconomic and

ecological contexts and the processes of rules and policy making, the costs and benefit

vary among the economic classes, castes, genders and ethnic groups. It also varies

with household and between household in the community. The costs and benefits of

addressing the equity issue include the financial, economic, social and political

processes in the community. Researchers found that- significant achievements have

been made in terms of policy and practice especially in the forestry sector. The need

for a change was recognized by the 1989 forestry sector master plan. The Forest Act

of 1993 and the Forest Regulations of 1995 in Nepal are notable progressive

frameworks that are meant for facilitating devolution of forest resource management

at the user level. However, along with such devolution of control over forest
 11

resources, there is an increasing concern among advocates of community forestry that

issues of equity and poverty within community forestry have not been adequately

addressed. Researchers and practitioners have reported several examples of inequity

in resource distribution as well as decision-making in community forests. It has been

also documented that the continued marginalization of women, poorer sub-groups,

socially disadvantaged sections and occupational castes within community managed

forests.

The research concluded that Justice in Common Property Resources (CPRs) is

directly associated with the distribution mechanism adopted by the utility committee.

The resource that have to be shared in equal and equitable manner so as to achieve the

communal justice , and the access of the women and the marginalized groups on the

decision making process of the User Groups(UG) committee is the vital norms

associated with the product distribution mechanism and thus Leads towards the social

justice.

Roche (2001) showed that the forestry sector in Nepal has seen a shift of

processes. The rural people know the sector as having the potential to participate in

natural resource and environmental management. The Forest sector has gone from

feudalism to a political democracy in which development practice has moved from

direct implementation to facilitating capacity growth in indigenous institutions. He

shows the characteristics of the era involved into four phases the date 1957 as "feudal

system of resource management donor certification defects: aristocratic" up to date

1975 in which expansion of the forest service, forest protection by staff and attention

of rural people have its characteristic features. The date 1976 to 1987, the sector has

two alternative characteristics or protection of forest using no rural people and the

protection by using rural people. Afterward 1987, the forest sector bear the
 12

characteristics of informing rural people of the right (legislation), developing roles

and responsibilities and capacity building government, non-government, rural and

urban people.

The conclusion made by Roche (2001) claims that the principle inherent in

community management requires a democratic process of decision making. In a

similar way the inclusiveness, equity and equality provided by this foundation. In

Nepal community forestry supports the protection and managing the forest and the

environment. Similarly, the sustainable management of resources is necessary for the

equitable distribution. In my research, I will look at whether sustainable management

of forest resources is sufficient for the equitable distribution or not.

2.4 Forest Policy and Practice

The forestry sector policy in Nepal can be divided into three broad groups, viz.

privatization (Pre- 1950), Nationalization (1937 and up to the mid 1970s) and the

community orientation which began in the late 1970s with the introduction of the

community forestry concept (Chhetri et.al. 2001). Following the democratic

resolution in 1950, the government nationalized all forests in 1957 in an attempt to

prevent the feudal Rana rulers from continuing to use Terai forests as their personal

property. Private Forest Nationalization Act 1957 was primarily concerned with

bringing an end to indiscriminate felling of trees in the Terai forests and the

unregulated trade of timbers with a view to check the further degradation of forests in

the country. However the nationalization of all forestland in 1957 and subsequent

protectionist practices of the government undermined indigenous management

systems and led to overgrazing and random harvests. This accelerated degradation of

the landscape and caused deforestation on a motive scale, which gave rise to the

emergence of community forestry in Nepal.

 13

Community Forestry has evolved as one of the major components of Nepal’s forest

development strategy during the past 25 years. With local Forest User Groups

(FUGS) resolving the forests with support from the government and donor agencies.

Community forestry is most accurately and usefully understood as an umbrella term

denoting a wide range of activities which link rural people with forests, trees and the

products and benefits to be derived from them. Gilmour and Fither (1991) define

community forestry resources by the rural people who use them especially for

domestic purposes and as an integral part of their farming system. Despite the rather

gloomy political and socioeconomic backgrounds. It is praiseworthy that community

forestry policy in Nepal has made considerable headway.

Community forestry in the mid-hills is often regarded as one of the few

notable success stories in the national context of poor public sector management,

improving people’s livelihoods on the one hand and conserving natural landscapes on

the other (Winrock, 2002). Though the current political crises in Nepal are casting a

shadow over community development efforts, there has been good progress in

community forestry initiatives. It is important to note that since there are not elected

officials at present in Nepal, CFUGs currently operating are the only existing form of

democratic governance in the country, albeit imperfect at times. The rate of formation

of governments in the country, albeit imperfect at times, the rate of formation of

FUGs has exceeded original estimates and backlog of groups formed across Nepal,

managing 15 percent of Nepal’s total forest land area (955,358 ha out of 630,6000 ha

of total forestland area), and over 28 percent of the land allocated is to be handed to

immunities (3,551,849 ha) (DoF, 2003). The formation of FUGs has proceeded at the

rate of about 1,000 per year. Some critics suggest that the emphasis on ‘quality’ of the

formation process has gradually changed to an emphasis on ‘quantity’. The

 14

implementation of community forestry has also proceeded in the Terai Region, with

1,477 FUGs (12 percent of the total) now managing 224,136 ha (DOF, 2003).

However, different conditions of high value and accessible forests, recent settlement

and problems in identifying and organizing user groups, together with wide spread

and organized illegal timber-felling, have eased much slower progress. (Springate

et.al. 2003) Illegal logging, fuel wood cutting, grazing, fire and agricultural

conversions have contributed to deterioration of Nepal’s forests.

The Master Plan for the Forestry Sector (1989) recognized that the restoration

of public forestlands in the hills could only be achieved through the participation of

local people (the users). It envisaged that people, principally through community

forestry concept was institutionalized through Forest Act (1993), Forest Regulations

(1995), the operational Guidelines (1995), Revised Operational Guidelines (2001-02),

and the Forestry Sector Policy (2000). These legal instruments have legitimized the

concept of CFUG as an independent, autonomous, and self-governing institution

responsible to protect, manage and use any patch of national forest with a defined

forest boundary and user group members CFUGs are to be farmed democratically and

registered at the District Forest office (DFO), with CFUG constitution, which defines

the rights of the users to a particular forest. The forest is handed over to the

community once the respective members through a number of consultative meetings

and processes prepares the Operational Plan (OP), a forest working plan, and submits

it to the District Forest officer (DFO) far approval. The plan has to be countersigned

by the Chairperson of the CUFG. The general assembly of the CFUG is the supreme

body to finalize the plan before it is submitted to the DFO for into approval. The plan

is generally implemented by an executive committee nominated by the general

assembly. (http://www.wrm.org)
 15

Despite three decades of supporting local forest management practices and the

achievements and contribution that community forestry has made in Nepal, there is

still a lack of appropriate approaches to assist community and local forest

stakeholders in developing monitoring mechanisms that could effectively help to

reflect, review and adapt their forest management practices and through this maximize

impacts on forest condition (landscape) and rural livelihoods. This leaves an urgent

need to develop effective monitoring mechanism and provide civil society with the

skills and tools to regulate the sector and monitor the forestry activities more

efficiently. Monitoring skills may also help to plan and decide the harvest and

marketing potential of forests and its resources. Recently, during the development of

and under the Tenth Plan, monitoring has become a highly recognized issue.

Considering the importance of effective implementation and monitoring of the

poverty reduction strategy, the Government is developing a comprehensive

participary implementation, monitoring and evaluation strategy, with technical

support and assistance from the development partners (Tenth Plan 2002-2007). To

address this, ministries have to develop their respective plans using a logical

framework approach where indicators are the key.

Besides community forests, some areas of forests in Nepal are classified as

leaseholds, which are leased to private individuals, co-operatives, institutions and

commercial enterprises. In 1998, National Planning Commission (NPC) of Nepal

declared leasehold forestry as a priority programme for poverty alleviation. These

allow for the leasing of land with degraded forest to poor communities on 40- year

leases, automatically renewable upon satisfactory adherence to the agreed operational

plan, with exclusive right to the produce of the land. A total of 25 districts has been

alleviation. 10 districts were already under this project by 1999 with initiative of
 16

Intentional Fund for Agriculture Development with Ministry of Forestry and Soil

conservation, Department of Forests (Ohler 2000). A new project is currently being

developed. (IFAD ,2003), In 1999-2000, there were a total of 1,549 leasehold forests

user groups with about 10,500 socially and economically disadvantaged families

managing some 6,600 ha of forest area in several districts of the country (Ohler 2000).

The leasehold forestry policy 2002 envisages the granting of leases to commercial

forestry enterprises, entrepreneurs for eco-tourism and households living below the

poverty line.

Some forests are owned, controlled and protected by the state (national forest).

(Forest Act, 1993) and some areas have been kept under protected areas system,

which form about 17 percent (24,717 Sq km) of the total land area of the country.

These consist of conservation areas, hunting reserves, wildlife resources, and national

parks (Resources Nepal 1999). With the introduction of the concept of Buffer Zone

area management, community orientation in protected areas system is getting wider

recognition. (Sharma, 1999).

The concept of preservation of forest resources along with development of

community are the turning point in the field of community forestry resource use and

distribution. The forest policy in Nepal, from the way it has evolved over time, can be

divided into three blood groups, via: Privatization (Pre-1950), Nationalization (1957)

and up to other mid-1970s and community oriented Forestry began in the 1970s with

the introduction of the community Forestry concept. The policies and practices

offered in the community are only able to support the local livelihood but not in

sustainable manner.

The study on CF is mostly on equity and social justice, institutional behaviour

and focuses on the socio-economic and livelihood matter. The research on policy,
 17

politics of the stockholders in Red Cross distribution are not found in sufficient and

proper. The overall research studies on community Forestry has been supported to the

rural livelihood more or less sustainable. The newly arising ashes as the national level

advocacy on the CF are lack of research. The trading of CF products in hapharzadious

ray now-a-days is also needed to be researched in upcoming days, this study to some

extend try to address the policy and practices in community Forestry.

2.5 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of policy and practices in community forestry is

shown in Figure-1.

POLICY AND PRACTICES IN COMMUNITY FORESTRY

Resource Distribution Social Justice

Under Group's Socio-economic Status Participation of male/ female in CF
Monetary value of the resources Role on decision making
Executive committee formation procedure
Inclusion of caste/ ethnicity

Socio-economic context Forest user Group's Characters

EXISTING REALITY

Figure 1: Policy and Practices in Community Forestry.

The chart illustrates the policy and practice in community forestry. The policy and

practices in community forestry can be achieved only through Resource distribution

and social justice. Resource Distribution goes on under groups socio-economic

status and monetary value of the resources – social justice consist of several factors
 18

such as.Participation of male/female in community forest.They also play the

important role on dicision making.Executive committee formation Procedure and

also inclusion of caste/ethnicity

 19

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODS

3.1 Research Design

The methodology comprises of reviewing literatures and field visit. Socio-

economic data were mostly collected for this study. This chapter describes the

methods adopted in this research. The study area, sampling design and procedure,

study framework, survey methods, data analysis techniques are discussed.

3.2 Rational of the selection of the study area

The Dhalpu Lamatar community Forest lies in the Maidi Village development

community -8, The total area of the forest is 125.83 ha, The total household of the

CFUG is 139 and total population of the community forest user group is 312 out of

which there are 170 male and 142 female; According to the well-being ranking of the

household there are 3 rich HH, 22 medium HH and 31 poor HH, from these HH 40%

Sampling has taken for House hold survey. Maidi is one of the VDC. In Dhading

district. It lies in between east Dhola VDC, west Budigandaki of Gorkha district;

north Chorigandaki of Khari VDC and south Galmakhola of Nalang and Salang VDC

Maidi is rich in forest resource. The VDC has a total population of 10,275 where the

male population of 4,927 and female population of 5,348. The number of households

is being 1,994 according to census 2011.

There are 26 community forests which occupy the total land area of 770 hector

and 6 leasehold forests with the area of 5 hector. Various studies have been conducted

on community forestry in Nepal but no research has been conducted in the ‘Dhalpu

Lamatar Community Forestry user group of Maidi-8, Dhading. Therefore, Out of 26

community forest and 6 leasehold forest in Maidi, the study site has been selected as

Dhalpu Lamatar community forestry user group because of easy access,

 20

economically in terms of cost, ethnic community managed CF and familiarity with

that FUGs and with its surroundings.

3.3 Nature and Sources of Data

Primary as well as secondary data were used for the study. Primary data were

collected by making field observations, interviews, focus group discussion in the

CFUGS. Similarly, Secondary data are collected from the study through published

and unpublished sources, which are available in the books, reports, constitution and

journals related to the spirit of the research topic. Secondary source of data were

collected from different research centers such as ICIMOD, FOREST-ACTION,

FECOFUN, MOF, MOFSC etc. Beside this, research issues are addressed through the

review of project and policy documents, previous research reports, official records,

operational plan and user’s committee records.

3.4 Universe and Sampling Procedure

Information and data were collected from primary and secondary sources. The

study is primarily based on primary data, which was collected through the

unstructured interviews, with the respondents. There were altogether 139 households

associated with the FUGs. The FUG is being homogenous group; it was not possible

to take interview with all FUG members. For the prominent source of data –

questionnaire-interview were carried out in 56 sampled members i.e. 40% of the total

households. These sampled households were selected by random sampling method

under the lottery random sampling system. Head-household member of CFUG’s was

taken for completing the questionnaire. In addition, focus group discussion with

different groups, group interviews and key informant interviews were carried out as a

part of field study. The objective of this research was to examine the policy and

practice in forest resources. How forest recourses were being distributed andwhat was
 21

its impact on social justice. Therefore, it was necessary to include the committee

members. Since the nature of the study was qualitative, local interview guides were

used to collect information correctly during study with the help of unstructured

questionnaire.

3.5 Data Collection Techniques

All the committee members of the FUGs were chosen as respondent. The

interview was taken to see the satisfaction of social justice in the distribution of

resource in the CPRM from the respondents. The interview was taken with women,

economically backward household and scheduled caste household under judgement

sampling procedure.

3.5.1 Focused Group Discussion

Focused group discussion was conducted with both men and women falling on

different classes according to wealth ranking. Focused group discussion was

conducted with CFU to access the present situation of CFM and the strategies adopted

to manage the CF in the study area. The ex-member of the executive committee and

interested members of the UG were involved during FGD. Concerning on the topic

according as a checklist the discussion was held. The discussion was conducted using

a checklist.

3.5.2 Observation

The researcher visited to the respondent's house to house as well as the forest

to gather primary information. The activities including user’s occupation and sources

of income, participation in the decision-making process in meetings, forest product

distribution and amount of forest product in homestead were observed. Informal

interviews at homestead and teashops supported and triangulated the observation

several times.
 22

3.5.3 Interview Schedule

A face-to-face questionnaire survey was conducted with 56 respondents out of

139 HHs is attached in Annex section. As the respondents were literate and illiterate,

Face-to-face interview was the only possible option to administer the questionnaire.

The questionnaire survey was conducted after observation and focus group discussion

meeting in CFUG. The respondents for the questionnaire survey from CFUG were

selected through random sampling method. The HH was the unit of observation.

Based on economic status, the HH of CFUG has divided into three strata via, rich,

medium and poor.

3.5.4 Key Informant Interview

Interview in most cases was conducted in grouped of family members,

encouraging the participation of women and aged people. Although most of the

questionnaires were closed-ended, in-depth-interview was also conducted with some

key informants like committee members, ex-VDC members, ex-EC members with an

expectation to gather detailed information.

3.6 Secondary Data

Previous research findings, Maps, Journals, and Publications, Published or

unpublished and other relevant literatures will be reviewed to perceive the better

understanding, interpretation and analysis of the research. Additional information was

also gathered to meet the objectives of the study. The approved of and constitutions,

the audit report and the minute of the CFUG were used to gather the information. The

research sublimates were also obtained from the internet search.

3.7 Data Analysis and interpretation

The crude data collected from the field were coded and refined Quantitative

data collected from field and respondents were tabulated. The tabulated data were
 23

compiled in the regular order in accordance of primary data and secondary data. The

data obtained from primary source and secondary sources were presented and

analysed by using different statistical tools. The data are displayed in descriptive

manner with the help of Bar-diagram, frequency curve, pie chart and analysis by

using percentage, mean, median.

3.8 Limitation of the Study

The DLCF of Maidi VDC has been studied with the background of

accessibility of resources and familiarity to the researcher. This study closely deals

with the specific forest users group (FUG) and may not give whole picture of other

CFUGS. In certain respects what may hold true of DLCFUGS may not hold true for

other community forestry therefore, some of the generalization were derived from the

observation of this area may not be applicable to the other developed area, which are

likely to differ in certain respects.

 24

CHAPTER 4

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS OF DHALPU LAMATAR COMMUNITY

FOREST USER GROUP

4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Maidi VDC of Dhading District

According to National census report 2001, Maidi VDC of Dhading district has been

tabulated. Other general information of the Maidi VDC with projected data of 2008

has been provided in the table below:

Table 1: General information of Maidi VDC of Dhading district

Particulars Census 2001 Projection 2011

Total population 10275 11570

Male 5927 6021

Female 5348 5549

Sex ratio 57:43 52:48

Total household size 1994 2156

Average household size 5 5.3

Literacy rate (%) 35% 45%

Population density per sq.km 160 162

Source: District Profile, 2011

The table shows that Maidi VDC of Dhading district had 10275 populations in

which male population is 5927 (57.68%) and female is 5348 (42.31%).there were

1994 households in the Maidi VDC that becomes 5 households in average household

size. The population density per sq.km was 160 in Maidi VDC Maidi VDC is a hilly

area, where its highland is Maidikot and the lowland is Maightar. In the east of Maidi

VDC situated Dhola VDC, in west Budhigandaki of Gorkha district as in Northern

side Chorigandaki of Khari VDC and in south Galamakhola of Nalarg and Salang
 25

VDC is located. The major rivers flows in the Maidi VDC are budhigandaki,

chrigandaki and golmolkhola.

4.1.1 Introduction to Dhalpu Lamatar Community Forest User Group

Dhalpu Lamatar Community Forest User Group ( DLCFUG) was formed and

registered in 2058/03/13 according to Nepal forest act, 1993 in Dhading district forest

office. DLCFUG is situated in Duwarthok of Maidi VDC, ward no 8. Its area is

125.83ha.The total no of household involved in management and forest product user

are 139. The forest is categorized as natural forest and type of forest is shore-

Robusta. The condition of forest is good i.e. reasonably dense forest. A committee

member of 11 is functioning as a board committee of DLCFUGs where 2 are female.

The under group belongs to the diversified ethnicity in which Tamang, Magar, Newar

etc. The religious group included Hindu, Buddhist and Christian.

4.1.2 Population status of sample household.

The population status of sampled household of DLCFUG is detailed in the

table below:

Table 2: Population Status of Sampled Household

Total population Average

Name of Head of household family
Caste
CFUG Male Female Total size
Male Female Total
Newar 90 74 164 18 10 28 5.8
Tamang 19 12 31 5 2 7 4.4
DLCFUG Magar 32 24 56 3 7 10 5.6
Damai 19 21 40 3 4 7 5.7
Kami 10 11 21 2 2 4 5.2
Total 170 142 312 31 25 56 5.3
Source: Field Survey 2012

The total number of household in DLCFUG is 139, out of them 56 (i.e.40% of

139) household were selected for the purpose of the interview. The total population of

the user group is 312 which comprise of 170 male and 142 female. The total
 26

population of sampled household is 312 where 31 household head are male and 25

household head are female.

4.1.3 Ethnic Composition of DLCFUG

DLCFUG is mainly inhabited by Newar, tamang, Magar and Dalits. The table

and figure below shows the ethnic composition of DLCFUG.

Table 3: Ethnic Composition of the Sampled Population in DLCFUGs

Ethnic group No. of population Percentage (%)

Newar 164 52.56

Tamang 31 9.93

Magar 56 17.94

Damai 40 12.82

Kami 21 6.73

Total 312 100%

Source: Field Survey, 2012

Table 3 shows that population of various ethnic group is 312, where Newars

52.56%, Tamang 9.93%, Magar 17.94%, Damai 12.82% and Kami 6.73%were found

during field survey. However, the total CFUGs comprised majority of Newar

population by 52.56% followed by Magar 17.94% similarly Damai 12.82% Tamang

9.93% and Kami 6.73% as shown in Figure.

 27

Figure 2: Ethnic Composition of DLCFUGs

PERCENTAGE (%)
Kami
7%
Damai
13%

Newar
Magar 52%
18%

Tamang
10%

Source: Based on Table 3

4.1.4 Ethnic Composition of DLCFUG’s HHs

DLCF area is inhabited by different ethnic groups. Out of total number of

household (Hh) the CFUG, 40% HH were taken as sample. For the study the ethnic

composition of DLCFUG’s HHs is shown in the table below:

Table 4: Ethnic Composition of DLCFUG’s HHs

Ethnicity No. Of HHs Percentage (%)

Newar 28 50

Tamang 7 12.5

Magar 10 17.85

Damai 7 12.5

Kami 4 7.14

Total 56 100
Source: Field Survey ,2012

In the study, various ethnic groups of the HH members are found in the

community. Table 4 shows the ethnic composition of HH were 50% are Newars,

12.5%are Tamang, 17.85% Magar, 12.5%Damai and 7.14% are Kami.

 28

Figure 3: Ethnic Composition of DLCFUG’s HHs

Percentage (%)
Percentage (%)

Kami 7.14

Damai 12.5

Magar 17.85

Tamang 12.5

Newar 50

Source: Field Survey 2012

Figure 2 shows that the ethnic composition of DLCFUG’s HHs was the

majority of Newar is high i.e.50% and followed by Magar 17.5%, Tamang 12.5%,

Damai 12.5%and Kami 7.14%.

4.1.5 Educational Status of the Population Involved in DLCFUG

Educational status of the population has been categorized into five different

groups as:(a) illiterate (b) Primary (c) lower secondary (d) secondary and (e) above

SLC. Here, illiterate means who can’t read and write, primary is from class 1-5, lower

secondary is up to class 7, secondary is from class 8-10 and above SLC for all the

higher study above SLC. Educational status of the population is presented in the

following table 5 and Figure 3.

 29

Table 5: Educational status of the DLCFUG population

Illiterate Lower. Total

Ethnicit Primar Secondar Abov
Tota secondar literat %
y % y y e SLC
l y e

12.8 39.7
Newar 40 57 32 11 24 124
2 4
Tamang 7 2.24 11 10 1 2 24 7.69
10.2
Magar 24 7.69 20 5 2 5 32
5
Damai 13 4.16 18 8 - 1 27 8.65
Kami 11 3.52 7 3 - - 10 3.20
30.4 69.5
Total 95 113 58 14 32 217
3 3
Source: Field Survey 2012

Table 5 shows that total no of illiterate are 95 i.e. 30.43% of the total

population. literacy percent is 69.53% of the total population and in number 217,

primary 113, lower secondary 58, secondary 14 and above SLC 32 out of total

population.

Out of the total population 95 are illiterates 217 are literate in percent 30.43%

are illiterate more 69.53% are literate. Primary education hold are in higher number in

the same level in the lower secondary 58 and lower secondary status as 32 are above

SLC.

4.1.6 Ethnic Composition of Sample Respondents

Ethnic composition of sample respondents and the percentage of HHs are as

shown in table below.

The survey shows the sample size of 56 HHs during study. The sample size

represented the entire ethnic group in the area as the total population was 31.
 30

4.1.7 Distribution of Respondents by Sex.

The respondents of this research include either male or female from the

households who involve in CF activities .The sex distribution of the respondents is

given in Table 7.

Table 6: Distribution of Respondents by Sex

Gender Total HHs Percentage (%)

Male 31 55.36
Female 25 44.64
Total 56 100
Source: Field Survey 2012

The respondents are of 55.36% male and 44.64% female. The distribution of

respondents by sex is as shown in Figure 4, below:

Figure 4: Distribution of Respondents by Sex

44.64
55.36

Male Female

Source: Field Survey 2012

4.1.8 Age Composition of the Respondent

The respondent are belong to different age group. They are categorised in

below 30, 30-60 and 60-above as shown in Table 8.

Table 7: Age Composition of the Respondent

Age group(in year) Household size Percentage

Below-30 16 28.58 %

30-60 31 55.35 %

60-above 9 16.07 %
 31

Total 56 100 %
Source: Field Survey 2012

Composition of age group was found as 55.35% in the group of 30-60,

28.58%in below 30 age group and 16.07%in 60-above age group. In the given Figure

5, age composition of the respondent are presented as:

Figure 5: Age Composition of the Respondent

Percentage
60.00%

50.00%

40.00%

30.00%

20.00%

10.00%

0.00%
Below-30 30-60 60-above
Source: Field Survey 2012

The above figure shows that the respondent of the study at age of 30-60 are of

high percentage as 60-above are less in age composition.

4.2 Composition of Respondents

According to socio-economic distribution: The study basically depends on

following criteria for wealth ranking of FUG household set by the FUG under

following headings.

4.2.1 Natural capital

Land is considered as Natural capital. Quantity of land varies between HH.

Economic status defines by the quantity of land holding by HH. Natural capital

impact in agriculture and livestock growth of Hh.

 32

Land holding of the respondents –natural capital mostly comprised of private

land and community forest area. The community forest has common access to all

under but the size of land holding varies in the field studies. The following Table 9

shows the land holding capacity of different HHs of DLCFUG.

Table 8: Land Holding of the Respondents

Land holding size

No of HH % of HH land holding size
(in ropani)
0-10 21 37.5
11-20 15 26.78
21-30 11 19.64
31-40 6 10.73
41-50 3 5.35
51-above 0 0
Total 56 100
Source: Field Survey 2012

Table above shows that the land holding of the respondents were higher

number of HH had low area of land and least No. of HH had more area of land.21 HH

had in average 5 ropani of land where 3 HH had average 45 ropani of land. The

distribution of land size of the respondent HHs shows in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Distribution of land holding size of respondent HH

 33

Chart
40-50
Title
5%
30-40
11%
0-10
38%

20-30
20%

10-20.
27%

Source: Field survey 2012

4.2.2 Financial Capital

Financial capital involves the income and involvement of the respondents.

Financial capital is various in the population. Financial capital includes household

income, livestock holding and occupational composition.

4.2.2.1 Household Income

During study the total income of each HH was estimated from different sectors

and average figures were calculated from questionnaire survey to the CFUG. The

calculation of HH incomes of FUG were calculated in the Table 10 below.

Table 9: Major sources of Annual Income (cash) in Sampled HHs

Annual No
income in Average share of HH income from different sectors of %
NRs (000) HH
Wage Foreign
Agriculture % % % Service %
labour Employment
0-20 26 72.2 15 50 1 5.6 2 14.28 11 19.64
20-40 6 16.67 3 10 - - 1 7.14 12 21.42
40-60 4 11.3 6 20 5 27.7 2 14.28 11 19.64
60-above - - 6 20 12 66.7 9 64.28 22 39.28
Total 36 100 30 100 18 100 14 100 56 100
Source: Field Survey 2012
 34

Large number of HH involved in agriculture was the major source of income

but the income is low in this category. Second large number of HH involve in foreign

employment but the income is high no of HH involve in foreign but employment but

the income is high in this category.

4.2.2.2 Livestock Holding in Sampled FUGs

The livestock farming is the major sector for income general activities Income

Generation Activities (IGA) of the FUGs. Heard of buffalo, cow/ox, folks of

goats/sheep and chickens were the main domestic animals in the study area. Table 10

shows the livestock holding in the sampled FUGs.

Table 10: Livestock Holding in the Sampled CFUG

Average
Types of Total no of Income from livestock
% livestock per
livestock livestock in previous year
HH

Buffalo 81 11.02 350000 1.4

Cow/ox 54 7.36 120000 0.96

Goats/sheep 227 30.8 3500000 4.05

Pig 29 3.94 155000 0.51

Poultry 344 46.80 57000 6.14

Total 735 100 4182000 13.06

Source, field survey 2011

The above table shows that there were only 81 buffalo, 54 cow/ox, 227 goats

or sheep, 29 pig and 344 poultry in number. In percentage there were 11.02%, 7.36%,

30.8%, 3.94%, and 46.80% buffalo, cow/ox, goats/sheep, pig and poultry

respectively. The study shows that poultry and goat/sheep were high in number.

4.2.3 Well-being Ranking

Well- being ranking is taken as mean value from the parameter for the ranking

of the income. Table 11 shows the wealth-being ranking of the sampled HH.
 35

Table 11: Well-being ranking of the sampled HH.

Income (in thousands) HH No. Percentage (%)

Rs.150000 and above 3 3.35

Rs.150000 – Rs 45000 22 39.28

Up to Rs.45000 and below 31 53.35

Total 56 100
Source: Field Survey 2012

Income above NRs.150000 is considered as rich which are 53.35 in percentage

and 3HH in number. Income Range annually between Rs 150000-45000 are

considered as medium class which are 39.28% and income maximum up to Rs 45000

and below this range per annum are ranked as poor category whose percentage is high

i.e. 55.35%.

4.2.4 Physical Capital

Physical capital involves access to drinking water, school; health centres etc.

generally rich have easy access to this capital while poor have less access to it.

Physical capital considered in the study area as indicators used by access to the

drinking water, access to the school (primary and high school) and access to the

health centres (SHP/HP/PH) centres).

4.2.4.1 Access to Drinking Water

As physical capital refers to access to drinking water, our study area and the

HH have to cover the distance and consumption of time to fetch water is as here in

Table 12.

Table 12: Access to drinking water for the respondents

Total no.
Type of water Sources Percentage %
Distance Covered of HH
(in meter) Natural Tap Personal Tap
HH no. % HH no. %
 36

0-100 21 51.26 17 100 18 32.14

100-500 12 30.76 0 29 51.78
500-1000 7 17.98 0 9 16.07
1000-above 0 0 0 0 0
Total 39 100 17 100 56 100
Source: Field Survey 2012

The above table shows that the distance of personal tap is only up to maximum

100m and 39 HH had access to the natural tap and 17 Hh had access to personal tap.

Thus, it is considered that more time consuming to fetch water that had access to

Natural tap than those whose access to personal tap.

4.2.3.2 Access to Education

Education opportunities are consider as another parameter to access the

physical capital of the respondents. Table 13 shows the Educational status of sampled

HH.

Table 13: Educational status of sampled HH

Literate
Wealt Illiterat
Primar Lower Secondar Above Tota
h e
y secondary y S.L.C l
Poor 10 15 5 1 0 31
Middle 4 5 6 3 6 22
Rich 0 0 0 0 3 56
Total 14 20 11 4 7 56
Source: Field Survey 2012

The illiterate number in poor is high. Education is directly linked with the IGA

which can be predicated from the above table.

4.2.4.3 Occupational Composition of Sampled HHs

Most of the people in the rural area were engaged in agriculture and livestock

farming. It was confirmed by the home visit and observation. The data presented in

Table 15 includes major occupation of the sampled HHs.

 37

Table 14: Major Occupational Status of Sampled HHs

S.N
0ccupations Rich Middle Poor Total %
.

1. Agriculture 1 8 16 25 44.64
2. Service/pension 1 4 2 7 12.5
3. Wage labour 0 3 10 13 23.21
4. Foreign employment 1 7 3 11 19.64
Total 3 22 31 56 100
Source: Field survey 2012

Agriculture is the main and highly involved occupation of the sampled HH.

Foreign employees are considered as high income holding HH and wage labour earns

least.

Figure 7: Distribution of Major Occupational Status of Sampled HHs

Agriculture

19.64 Services/pension

44.64
wage labour
23.21

12.5 Foreign employment

Source: Field Survey 2012

Among DLCFUG, 44.64% HHs were primarily engaged in agricultural

livestock occupation. Similarly, foreign employment occupied the19.64% of the total

HH. During study, it has found that the agriculture was decreased throughout the year

while wage-labour and foreign employments were increased in these recent years.
 38

4.2.5 Social capital

Social capital includes the up bring of social institutions, leadership of the

community and gender. It consists of the CFUG networks and interrelation.

Similarly, uprising poor, marginalized and women are the issue under social capital.

Gender is the integral and inseparable part of rural livelihood. The study was

concentrated to collect information from a number of respondents. There were a large

number of male respondents. Since, old age male numbers were found considerably

large in number during study. Only single HH with male involved in the foreign

employment and labour wage in urban areas were found during questionnaire

collection. During questionnaire collection, in some cases, female expect the answers

from their males as they hesitated to spoke the truth of their livelihood.

The major work of female was agriculture and livestock. They were the local

experts for the collection of fuel wood and fodder but women were also interested in

the development activities. They were seen in the frontline during meetings and

general assembly of CFUGs. There were only 36.3% female in the operational plan

committee in the DLCFUG is as to the national commitment. The participation of the

male in decision making and simply male discrimination in the HH activities can

predicate there is also gender biasness.

4.2.6 Human Capital

Skills and training made the human capital. Those skills training and

opportunities are used for the IGAs which help to reduce poverty. It includes gained

skills, receiving different information and through trainings and workshops. It

facilities the users to develop their personalities, skills to grab the opportunities.
 39

4.2.6.1 Trainings, workshops and opportunities

In DLCFUGs they are totally absent to have any training, workshops by any

national or governmental or non-governmental organizations. The opportunity they

created themselves from their own skills and indigenous knowledge no any supportive

has they found to create opportunities and markets for their products.
 40

CHAPTER 5

RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION IN DHALPU LAMATAR COMMUNITY

FOREST USER GROUP

This chapter presents and analyse the distribution of Forest products collected

from DLCF. Distribution of resource and benefit sharing in the monetary terms are

calculated. Distribution of resources does not simply mean that everyone are receives

an equal share of Forest products. In fact, sustainable forest management is probably

not possible if everyone is entitled to an equal share. Rather equality refers to the

process by which distribution decisions are made, as well as distribution of resources

to alleviate poverty within the FUG.

5.1 Forest Recourses in Dhalpu Lamatar Community Forest

The majority of people in Dhalpu Lamatar Community Forest User Group

depend on forest to support agriculture and livestock system. Community forestry

provides fuel wood especially for cooking and heating. Timber products are used for

building and construction and parallel used in furniture to run small cottage industries,

fodder for livestock, leaf-litter for compost and range of non-timber products.

Community forestry also plays a crucial role in maintenance and conservation. For the

FUG community forestry are primarily the only sources of forest products.

The DLCF has allowed its users to collect grasses and leaf-litter through the

year, fuel wood collection is done in the months of falgun, chaitra and baisakh only.

Similarly, for the purpose of house construction FUG distribute the timber to the

needy household throughout the year by paying certain sum of money. The collection

of forest products from CF are tabulated in the following Table 5.1.

 41

Table 15 : Annual forest products collection from DLCFUG. (in FY 2068/69)

Fuel products(in Poor (31) Medium (22) Rich (3) Total %

head load)
Fuel wood 1835 2095 230 4160 6.94
Fodder 12035 15985 970 28990 48.39
Timber(cu.ft) 485 725 187 1397 2.33
Leaf-litter 10998 12990 221 24209 40.41
NTFP(in mutha) 310 525 310 1145 1.91
Total 25663 32320 1918 59901 100
Source: field survey 2012. (1 mutha=2.5 kg approx)

From above table no.5.1, interprets that the poor category HH have been

collecting less forest product with respect to medium and rich category. Rich and

medium category are collecting fuel wood, fodder, timber and leaf- litter from the CF

in near about sufficient as per their number in size. Since the poor category does have

less livestock’s thus they collect fodder and leaf- litter in less amount. Poor and

medium category collect less Non-timber forest product (NTFP) as compares with

rich because it is known that market access is high with rich than the others. Annual

FPC from DLCF by the CF members as poor category, an average of timber, 10998

head load of leaf- litter and 310 mutha of NTFP. Thus, the total HH number of poor is

marked as 31 HH in the study area. Likewise, 230 HL of fuel wood, 970 HL of

fodder, 187 cu.ft of timber, 221 HL of leaf- litter and 310 mutha of NTFP were found

to be collected by 3 HH during study.

From the above analysis, it is clear that rich HH get is benefit more in

collection of fodder, timber, leaf- litter and NTFP as compared to poor as well as

medium ones. The rich category HH consist of large number of livestock so, their

collection of forest product is higher than that of other categories. Fuel wood and

NTFP collection is also high in rich. Rich category know the market and its value of

NTFP so, they collect it in large amount. During field study, it is found that the NTFP
 42

like Nigro, tubors and alloo are highly collected by the rich while poor are almost

ambiguous about the market value and utilization of these NTFPs.

The respondent said that the FP is collected as per their requirement since 95%

respondents said that the forest products are collected as per their requirements

according to CFUGs rules and regulations. The FUG used to collect fuel wood,

fodder, leaf- litter, timber and NTFPS nearby forest handed overall community

forestry. From supply side perspective, there is no other alternative source of energy

to replace fuel wood, thus demand of wood cutting is more prevailing in the study

area. Although the green fuel are restricted as per rule but poaching of timber and

NTFPs are frequently happen, according to the villagers, this can be concluded as

there is problem in policy and practice because of the monitoring and evalusating

bodies are almost absent in the community forestry management. The elites handled

all the activities. The forest is quite near the village and it is about 15 minute walk to

collect forest products. Among the total respondents men and women together collect

forest products.

5.2 Demand for forest products in DLCFUG

It is observed that there is limited forest products especially shortage of timber

wood and log. Maximum demand of fire wood, leaf- litter and fodder. The following

Table 5.2. Focuses on the demand for forest products from different wealth categories
 43

Table 16: Annual demand of forest product in DLCFUG (In FY 2068/69)

Forest product(head Poor (31) Medium Rich Total %

load) (22) (3)
Fuel wood 1975 2150 230 4355 6.91
Fodder 12750 16320 970 30040 47.68
Timber (cu.ft) 510 885 240 1635 2.59
Leaf- litter 11570 14030 221 25821 40.98
NTFP(in mutha) 310 525 310 1145 1.81
Total 27115 33910 1971 62996 100
Source : Field Survey 2012. 1 mutha=2.5 kg.

Figure 8: Annual Demand of Forest Product in DLCFUG

1.81
6.91

40.98

47.68

2.59
Fuel wood Fodder Timber (cu.ft) Leaf- litter
NTFP(in mutha)

Source : Field Survey 2012

From the above figure. No 5.1, it is seen that 47.68% of fodder is the demand

of FUG for the domestic purpose. Similarly, 40.98% of leaf- litter, 6.91% of fuel

wood, 2.59% of timber and 1.81% of NTFP. The total demand of UG could not meet

by the CF alone. Thus, FP from other private forest was also purchased. During

interaction with the CFUG in DLCF and focus group discussion with the respondent

HH they view that there is abundance of forest products but the forest users are not

getting much benefit as their expectation. Forest policy and the community practise is

not working together as to serve the FUG as environmental issues remaining constant.
 44

Roughly, it is calculated that less than 60% of the FP is being supplied throughout the

year by DLCFUG.

5.3 Consumption of forest products from DLCF

Since the study focus on consumption of forest products according to the

wealth strata, the poor, middle- class and rich class extracted the forest resources

according to their needs. The prime supply of fuel wood is done by the CF in all three

wealth categories.

Table 17: consumption of forest products from DLCF

Wealth Fuel wood Fodder head Timer cu. ft. Leaf-litter NTFP Total
categori head load load head load Muttha
es Amou % Amou % Amou % Amou % Amou % Amou %
nt nt nt nt nt nt
Poor 1975 45.3 12750 42.4 510 31.1 11570 44.8 310 27.0 27115 43.0

(31) 5 4 9 0 7 4
Medium 2150 49.3 16320 54.3 885 54.1 14030 54.3 525 45.8 33910 53.8

(22) 6 2 2 3 5 2
Rich (3) 230 5.28 970 3.22 240 14.6 221 0.83 310 27.0 1971 3.12

8 7
Total 4355 100 30040 100 1635 100 25821 100 1145 100 62996 100
Source: Field Survey 2012

According to the above table, community forestry contributes the wealth

categories in discriminate manner. The middle class wealth holder takes large benefit

about 53% of total distribution from forest products. Similarly, rich wealth holder

consumer about 3% of the total distribution only about 43% of the forest products has

been consumed by poor section of the society.

 45

Figure 9: consumption of forest products from DLCF

3.12

43.04
53.82

Poor (31) Medium (22)

Rich (3)

Source: Field Survey 2012

The study shows that rich takes a maximum benefit from community forestry

according to their HH size then after middle class wealth holder consumed

sufficiently. Finally, the less consumption of forest product was by the poor HH as the

size of HH is large of DLCFUG.

5.4 Distribution of community forestry benefit on different wealth categories

(monetary terms)

The total HHs of DLCFUG benefits on different wealth categories.

Consumption in monetary terms as how the distribution of forest resources is being in

practice is as shown in the table below:

Table 18: Impact of CF benefit on different wealth categories (monetary terms)

Wealth CF contribution / year (Head load)

categorie Total
Fuel wood (1) Fodder (2) Timber (3) Leaf litter (4) NTFP (5)
s (NRs)
Qt. NRs. Qt. NRs. Qt. NRs. Qt. NRs. Qt. NRs.
Poor (31) 1975 29625 12750 89250 510 54570 11570 57850 310 4030 235325
Medium 2150 52250 16320 124240 885 94695 14030 70150 525 6825 1346160
(22)
Rich (3) 230 3450 970 6790 240 25680 221 1105 310 4030 41055
Total 4355 65325 30040 210280 1635 174945 25821 129105 1145 14885 1622540
Source : Field Survey 2012

1) Head load= NRs.15

 46

2) Head load=NRs.7

3) Cu. Ft=NRs107

4) Head load=NRs 5

5) Mutha=NRs 13

Above table, shows that poor HH in the community takes less benefit from the

poor category. Middle class takes the high benefit and the rich category takes

sufficient benefit but the poor takes less than the all. During field study, it is observed

that the linkage with market and migration in cities made the communication strong in

case of medium category. So they have the high access to the resources. Rich class

use sufficient amount of resources as being the population is less. Poor category is

directly depending upon the CF for the livelihood. While poor HHs lies in the bottom

in order to consume the community forestry products, in this study, it has been closely

observed that poor categories are suffering from trickle down effects.

Figure 10: Distribution of CF benefit on the different wealth categories monetary

terms)

1500000
1400000
1300000
1200000
1100000
1000000
900000
800000
700000
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
Poor (31) Medium (22) Rich (3)

Source: Field Survey 2012

It can be analysed, from above line graph that poor HH in the community

takes less benefit as compare to the middle and rich. Rich category has less population

and took sufficient benefit; middle takes high benefit due to access on
 47

communication, education and migration. The Poor 31 HH consumes NRs 235325 i.e.

14.50% out of total NRs 1622540. Middle 22 HH consumed about Rs 1346160

i.e.82.96%. Out of total NRs.16, 22,540. Similarly, rich 3 HH consumed about

NRs.41,055 i.e. 2.53% of the total sum of NRs.1622540.

 48

CHAPTER 6

POLICY, PRACTICES AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

6. Policy and Practices

This chapter remains the core of the study. Based on the respondent’s response

and the practices in the CF, this chapter analyse the different response categories of

the respondents related to participation in various committees, process of decision

making and fund mobilization for local area development.

6.1 Process of Executive Committee Formation

DLCFUG was established and operated from 2058/03/13 under the National

Forest Act 1993. Executive Committee of 11 members where 3 women was formed

under the constitution of DLCFUG. The procedure that had been adopted in the

DLCFUG to choose the Executive Commute (EC) is as described below. The EC

consists of 11 persons, including the president, vice president and a treasurer. All of

whom worked in an honouree capacity. The EC are elected at a general assembly of

the DLCFUG, which is being held once in every 2 years. EC are being formed by the

mutual conscious of the FUGs in a special meeting of the FUGs. The tenure of

committee member is of 2 years.

As there is no any election criteria is adopted to form the EC. In the

constitution of DLCF there has been mentioned of the election (article 7) but in

practice it is not found, one of the policy of maintaining the community forestry is

also being manage in a democratic way, but practice of election is not found during

the study. General assembly is to be held to form a new EC for the consequent year.

In this meeting, every member had an equal right to speak, vote and discuss on any

matter concerning the management of the CF. The level of fines for members caught

committing forest offences were also decided at this special meeting. The president
 49

was responsible for all works connected with the CF with auditing their accounts and

with general information.

6.2 Participation

The authorized body of the CFUG, that provided opportunities for user to

incorporate their voices in the decision making process is the general assembly. In this

regard, how often users of all economic and social classes participate in the assembly

and whether voices are actually incorporated or not is very crucial. The provision of

having 51% of the users in the general assembly has been made in the constitution of

DLCFUG.

6.2.1 Participation in General Assembly by Sex

While discussion in the meetings, it is generally assumed that all members

raise their view either on personal discuss or common issues or on both and take part

actively in discussion. Following table no.20 shows the figure of participation in

general assembly by sex.

Table 19: Participation in General Assembly by Sex

Participation in general assembly

Statement Value by sex in percentage (%)
Male Female
Attendance in the general assembly Always 100 66.67

Sometimes 0 33.33

Never 0 0

Feel free to express the opinion Yes 100 100

No 0 0

Respect of the views by others Yes 100 66.67

No 0 33.33
Source: Field Survey 2012
 50

Male participants represent the general assembly always by attending cent

percent. Female representation in the general assembly by 66.67% always and

sometimes only 33.33 percent that the adequate representation. Male and female by

sex have an equal rights and opportunities, that they feel free to express the opinion.

The respect of the views are highly respect for male then that of female. The given

Figure 11 shows the presence of the male and female in last general assembly.

Figure 11: Presence of the Male and Female in Last General Assembly (Fy
2068/69)

55 51
50 49
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Female
Male

Source: Field Survey 2012

In the last general assembly, out of the total users present, there were 51

percent male and 49 percent female in DLCFUG.

6.2.2 Participation in General Assembly by Caste

In DLCFUG, the involved caste group are Newars, Tamang, Magars, Damai

and Kami they all represents the ethnic community, but Kami and Damai, they are so

called as Dalits. The given table no.6.2. Show the HH number and percentage

participate in general assembly by caste. Figure 6.1 presents the participation

percentage of caste / ethnicity in GA.

 51

Table 20: HH Number in GA by caste (FY 2068/69S)

Attendanc
Percentag Percentage of
Caste No. of percentag e HH
e of total caste/ethnicit
/Ethnicity HHs e (%) number in
HH in GA y in GA
GA
Newar 28 50 23 41 79
Tamang 7 12.5 7 13 100
Magar 10 17.85 10 18 100
Dami 7 12.5 6 11 85
Kami 4 7.14 3 5 76
Total 56 100% 49 88%
Source : Field Survey 2012

Figure 12: Participation in General Assembly by Cast / Ethnicity group

individually

120

100 100
100
85
79 76
80

60

40

20

0
Newar Tamang Magar Damai Kami
Caste /Ethnicity

Source: Based on table 6.2.

From the above figure, the total representation of CFUG in the general

assembly is remarkable. The representation of HH in GA, Which is caste wise that is

Newar by 79%, Magar 100%, Tamang 100%, Damai 85% and Kami 76%. Thus the

participation in GA by caste is in sufficient and holistic representative of various

ethnicity/caste. Thus it could be predicate that the policy of involvement of all caste

and ethnicity in the utilization and management of common property recourse (forest
 52

act 1993).practices of participation in GA by caste is observed as according to policy

in DLCFUG.

6.2.3 Participation in the General Assembly by the Wealth Class

In general assembly the participation of FUG is also determine by the wealth

class, table below shows the participation in the general assembly by the wealth class.

Table 21: Participation in General Assembly by the Wealth - Class

S.N. Wealth-class Frequency of attendance Number of people.

1 Rich Always 3
Sometimes 0
2 Medium Always 15
Sometimes 7
3 Poor Always 31
Sometimes 0
Source: Field Survey 2012

Participation in the general assembly of the medium seems rather small. The

condition rose, according to the respondent, due to their work and busy household

schedule. The provision of having all class of people in the general assembly has not

been made in the CFUG. Therefore, the representation of all class people is not the

mandatory in the CFUG except some of the people take issue later with decision taken

without the representation of all class of the peoples. However, the policy is not

implemented and the practice is not according as policy in DLCF.

6.3 Participation in Executive Committee

To be selected in committee is considered as a feeling of participate in

community which ultimately gives opportunities in several aspects of the society.

6.3.1 Ethnic Group in the Executive Committee

The representation of the ethnic group in the executive committee of

DLCFUG is Newars, Tamang, Magar and Dalits (Damai-Kami). The given figure
 53

no.6.2, presents the representation of ethnic group in the executive committee of

DLCF.

Figure 13: Representation of the Ethnic Group in Executive Committee

50
45
40
35
30
Percentage

25
20
15
10
5
0
Newar 45% Tamang 20% Magar 20% Kami 10% Damai 10%
Castes/Ethnicity

Source: Field Survey 2012

In the constitution of the DLCF, there is provision of keeping the all cast in the

committee in the proportional basis. The figure represents the proportion of ethnic

group in executive committee is according to the provision made in the constitution of

the FUG. Here, it can be analysis that the policy adopted is practiced in the formation

of executive committee.

6.3.2 Representation of Women in the Executive Committee

In the constitution of the DLCFUG, there is the provision of keeping 33%

female in the Executive Committee. This prevention has been strictly follows in

DLCFUG. The given Figure 6.4, presents the representation of women in the

executive committee

Figure 14: Representation of Women in the Executive Committee

 54

Female

Sex

Male

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percentage

Source: Field Survey 2012

In executive committee, the number of women representation is according to

the provision in constitution of DLCF. The policy of FUG is implemented in practice

by the executive committee. Formation of Executive Committee by representing the

female of 36% in DLCFUG Executive Committee.

6.3.3 Participation in the Executive Committee According to the Wealth Class

According to the wealth class, the respondent to be selected in the executive

committee is highest of the poor class then medium class and of the rich class. The

given figure no.18, shows the representation in the executive committee according to

the wealth class.

Figure 15: Representation of the CFUG Members in Executive Committee

According to Wealth Class.
 55

100
90
80
70
Percentage 60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rich
Poor
Medium

Source: Field Survey 2012

In the FUG, the people from the rich category are totally the EC and poor are

less and medium are also in least rank. The poor showed the lower interest to be the

executive member because they hesitate that they are mostly from poor class of the

economy and many of them were illiterate and showed their incapability to derive in

such a position.

6.4 Decision Making Practice

Decision-Making process in CF extra a profound influence in the process of

community Forestry activities. Following study deals with the decision-making area,

mode of decision-making and Role of an Individual member in decision-making

process. This deal being practiced, and is according to the constitution of CFUG.

The FUG on an special meeting make decision on collection of the Fund. The

Fund is collected by the treasure of the committee. Mobilization of the fund is through

the FUG committee and the selection cretira for the fund mobilization is decided by

the FUG committee meeting. Ex-committee members stand as an advisory member

for the present executive committee. General people viewed that the time duration of

the Executive committee should be at least 5 years.

 56

6.4.1 Decision Making Areas

The effective implementation of operational plans and other programs of the

FUGS mainly depend upon the rational decisions made by them. As decision making

process is considered as a bridge between thought and action, right decisions in right

time in participatory manner have shown the best result in many cases. The general

decisions made by the FUGS are listed in the following tables:

Table 22: Decision Making Areas of the FUGS

FUG Decision making areas

DLCFUG  Rotational stick system for guarding the forest
 Weeding the forest
S
 Providing small credit for its member in sickness, maternity

period etc.
 Collection of Rs.2/- levy per month for the FUG fund
 FECO-FUN affiliation
 Plantation
 Conservation of the plantation area
 Acquisition of seed and seedlings
 Renew of OP and its expenditure
 Penalty of Rs.150 and Rs.100 group and committee members

respectively if absent in the meetings.

 Change in few topics of the FUG constitutions
 New membership
 Fill up of vacant positions in the committee
 Demarcation of forest
 Fund collection from internal sale of fuel wood.
 Nursery establishment.
 Conflict resolution within user
 Penalties
 Establishment of a tap of drinking water, school, roads.
 Annual and periodic programmes.
Source: Field Survey 2012

The nature of decisions to be made in only those subject matters mandated by

the FUG assembly. All decisions are made in a single forum i.e. all members meeting.
 57

6.4.2 Mode of Decision Making

 The decisions in the meetings have been found taken in consensus of the

attendants made in GA.

 They have been made their decisions in consensus.

 Majority made consensus and later make decision.

Hence, the figure has provided a general scenario of getting consensus while

taking the decisions in CF activities.

6.4.3 Discussion on Household Level

In a question asked whether there was any discussion on and advice from HH

level prior to attend the meetings, it was found that 95% inform their family members

about the meetings but only 25% discuss and take advice. The figure is because of

female members of whom about 80% do general discussion and take advice from the

family if applicable i.e. only when there is husband and / or adult children. The

women whose husband and adult son is careless of the subject matter generally do not

discuss and take advice prior to attend the meetings but if he is interested she will

always have taken advice from him. But about 75% of male members are found not to

take advice from the household period to attend the meetings.

Figure 16: Discussion on HH Level Prior to Attend the Meetings

100
80
Percentage

60
40
20
0
Discussion No Discussion
Male Female
 58

Source: Field Survey 2012

Similarly, after participating in the meetings whether they informed their

families about the decisions made? 90% respondents are found to give affirmation in

this case and rest 10% who are female members do not necessarily inform as their

husband do not care and be indifference generally in forest related issues. So, why

different in case of males. This is because the decision made in such meetings are

naturally on forest related and its management activities which are undoubtedly

considered the women's job and for this, the males must inform them that decisions

requiring immediate implementation.

6.4.4 Role of Individual Members

What should be the role in decision making process of community forestry

activities should have recognized by its users, identified role helps them to actively

participate in such activities. For the users, a number of them have not yet identified

their role in rational decision making process of community forestry. 50% users have

not clearly identified their role in decision making because it is lack of information

and education about CF.

Apart from this, they have added some other tips for the betterment of the

decision making process which include extra commitment of members, obey rules and

regulations set in the FUG constitution, avoid selfishness and authoritarian. As a

result, they have increasingly been interested in CF activities. Some of them are found

unknown about their role clearly.

6.4.5 Silvicultural Operation and Product Collection System

The provision made for product collection system as quite different from other

CF in case of DLCF. For the collection of grass, the forest is kept open for a month

and the users can go to the forest and collect the grass in equal amount. For the
 59

purpose of collection of the wood and timber, the users decide the date of weeding

and cleaning and collection of the fuel wood and timber. The entire user should

participate. Fuel wood is distributed according to the HH member number and Timber

is distributed as on the need and available basis. The worker on basis of wage is

employed. After finishing the weeding and cleaning work piles of the wood and

timber are made and distributed.

6.4.6 FUGC Reformation

In CFUGs, the duration of the committee member is of two years. At the time

of the end of the duration, the committee member should calls users and the new

committee is chosen from the presence of 51% of the users in a General assembly.

In executive committee president is in powerful condition as provided by the

constitution of CFUG. Secretary and treasurer hold next in power, the financial sector

remains in their decision and they finally issue the cheques.

Executive committee formation is completed in four stages, at first, the acting

executive committee call upon general assembly. The information about GA was

providing by general secretary through face to face contact reaching door to door of

the UG.

Secondly, GA is held and in GA, there will discuss upon the issues relating to

CF in previous as well as future resolution.

Thirdly, panels of different groups are presented with the future resolution and

this could be going through other few days.

Finally, at fourth stage a panel of EC will be selected in consensus manner for

the following 2 years period. General people viewed that the time duration of the

Executive committee should be at least 5 years.

 60

6.5 Fund Collection and Mobilization

Generally CF should have a fund itself and DLCF has its own fund collection

and mobilization criteria, no any aid from outside have been granted for DLCF. The

Table 6.5 shows the source of fund and its mobilization.

Table 23: Fund Collection and Mobilization

FUG Source of fund Areas of fund mobilization

DLCFU - Collection of Rs.2/- - Providing small credit for its member in
G levy per month for the sickness, maternity period.
FUG fund.
- Membership fees - FECOFUN application fee, purchase of tools
(Handsaw and crosscut saws), a kettle and
glasses for tea while Silvia -cultural
operations.
- Internal sale of grass, - Maintenance of drinking water tap, Renew
fuel wood and timber shade of schools building, adult literacy
purpose.
- Interests, penalties, - Forest guard payment
forest products price

Generally, the amount of FUG’s funds has been found deposited on bank

account and within members. The investment of fund in forest development and

women awareness fields is very low as compared to community development sectors.

The most common area of amount incurred by the FUGs was found to be FECOFUN

membership fee. The FECOFUN being a professional umbrella organization of the

FUGs special attention has been paid to it. IGA are primarily agriculture based like

goat keeping, pig keeping and gardening. The FUG on a special meeting makes

decision on collection of the Fund. The Fund is collected by the treasure of the

committee. Mobilization of the fund is through the FUG committee and the selection

criteria for the fund mobilization are decided by the FUG committee meeting. Ex-

committee members stand as an advisory member for the present executive

committee.
 61

6.6 Social Justice

Community forestry is identified as a participatory approach of forest

management where CFUG members are fully authorized to plan and implement the

activities for their collective benefit. Both the men and women have equal concern on

the community forestry and its products. The given Table 6.6 shows the involvement

of male and female separately in specific task.

Table 24: Involvement of Male / Female in Forest Product Collection

Forest products Male (%) Female (%)

Fodder 10 90
Timber 90 10
Leaf-litter 5 95
NTFP 65 35
Source: Field Survey 2012

Study shows that women are the primary users of forest and involvement in

forest based activities are part of their life. They are the major collectors of forest

products and the frequent goers in search of fuel, fodder, and ground grass. Figure 6.8

shows that the involvement of male / female in forest product collection.

Figure 17: Involvement of Male / Female in Forest Product Collection

160
140
120
100
Percentage

80
60
40
20
0
Fodder Timber Leaf-litter NTFP

Female Male

Source: Field Survey 2012

 62

Study result shows that female involvement in the CF activities for collecting

fodder is of 90%, leaf-litter 95% and NTFP 35% lees income generating and

household products are collected by women only and income generating products

such as timber and NTFP (herbal products) are cash products, in which the

involvement of male is high. Women have fewer opportunities for income earnings as

most of them involve in traditional farming activities. Unequal access and control to

the private property is a root cause, so women are put in weaker bargaining position

and they hesitate to participate in decision making forum of CF which ultimately

limits their leadership. Study shows that. Women are still behind men and they have

been mostly confined within the boundaries of the households. Thus, the social justice

is more vulnerable in CF. Benefiting women and improving gender equality in the

long run requires a complete gender mainstreaming throughout the policy and

implementing structures and mechanisms.

6.6.1 Representation of Caste / Ethnicity in Executive Committee

In CF the basic institution is the CFUG, which consists of all members who

meet periodically as an assembly, and an executive committee that takes key decision

making roles on behalf of the CFUG. The composition of the committee is thus a

critical issues in terms of decisions about the use of the CF. In principle the EC should

have representation from all caste / ethnicity, and thus its decisions will reflect the

needs and desires of all members which leads to the social justice. The Table 6.6,

below shows the representation of caste, ethnicity in EC of DLCFUG.

Table 25: Representation of Caste / Ethnicity in the EC

Caste/ Populatio Percentage in total Members Percentage

ethnicit n population (%) in EC representation in EC
y (%)
Newar 164 52 5 45
Magar 56 18 2 18
Tamang 31 10 2 18
 63

Caste/ Populatio Percentage in total Members Percentage

ethnicit n population (%) in EC representation in EC
y (%)
Damai 40 13 1 9
Kami 21 7 1 9
Total 312 100 % 11 100 %
Source: Field Survey 2012

Above table shows, the representation of DLCFUG in EC by caste / ethnicity

is remarkable. All the caste/ethnicity have the proportional representation which can

cause better improvement in social justice. The Figure 6.9, below presents the

representation of case / ethnicity in the EC of DLCFUG.

Figure 18: Representation of Caste/Ethnicity in the EC

60
52
50
45

40
Percentage

30

20 18 18 18
13
10 9 9
10 7

0
Newar Magar Tamang Damai Kami

Population EC member

Source: Field Survey 2012

In the figure presented above, the Newars of population 52% had 45%

representation in EC, likewise 18% population of Magar had 18% representation,

10% of Tamang had 18%, 13% of Damai had 9% and 7% of Kami had 9% of

reproduction in EC. The EC had the total representation of caste / ethnicity

 64

proportionally. The marginalized group, so called Dalits i.e. Damai and Kami had also

a total and pinoor representation in EC, which determine the practice of social justice

is quite better in DLCFUG.

6.6.2 DLCFUG in Community Development

The CFUG funds (Financial capital) and the CFUG institution (social capital)

can be used to develop physical capital such as roads, drinking water supply, school

etc. at community level which improve the well being of the people and the

developing such type of local institutions helps to sustain the social justice. In case of

DLCFUG, it can be observed that the UG is helping to sustain the development of

their community and village. Through discussion on a regular meeting the UG take

decision to support the infrastructure of the village and they had done it was observed.

6.6.2.1 Road Construction

DLCFUG, maintain the village road by planting "zetropha" plant in the side of

the road. The "Berna" of zetropha was seeded and grown in the nursery of DLCF, the

special. Purpose in the plantation of zetropa is to reduce soil erosion.

6.6.2.2 Drinking Water

Drinking water taps are brought by the DLCFUG, to support the drinking

water supply of the community. The taps also helps to stop the water running from the

pipe supply going wastage.

6.6.2.3 School Building

DLCFUG helps to change the school shade and brought 10 bundles of zinc

plates. Also, support to school in the form of teacher's salaries fund and timber

contribution for constructing school building and furniture.

Thus, the support of DLCFUG in the community development process by

supporting on the sectors like: Road building, drinking water and school buildings.
 65

Support from DLCFUG in various sector as communality member and social

institution, they take responsibility towards the community and which ultimately

valuable to maintain the social justice.

 66

CHAPTER- 7

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION

7.1 Summary

The study on “Policy and Practice in Community Forest Resources Users is

intended to assess the existing policies of Resources distribution and practices of

serial justice, through a case study of CF in DLCFUG of Dhading District.

The community is heterogeneous in DLCFUG, there are several ethnic

community and also the presence of so called Dalits. Wealth-rank, education, access

of resources like: Drinking water, school, health-services are identified and

categorized. Similarly, other social condition and human capital of the respondents

are taken into the consideration during wealth-ranking.

The study is conducted using both qualitative and quantitative method. The

data collection is done through questionnaire, field survey, observation and

interviews. Similarly, the secondary data is collected through books, journals, reports,

development profile of CFD, operation plan of CF and other published and

unpublished sources, The data and information collected have been tabulated, edited

and presented in bar diagrams, pictures. To analyse the data descriptive method as

well as percentage and average etc. have been employed.

The major source of income of the FUG fund is the sale of Forest products

especially Timber, but not contributed significant Fund. The main sources are entry-

fee, penalties CFUG launched several programs for the development of community

and upliftment of the status of CFUG launched several programs for the development

of community and upliftment of the status of CFUG members.

 67

The research has focused on the contribution of CF to the livelihood of Forest

users. Participation of women and role of members in the decision-making process is

inclusive. Women’s empowerment through education, training and meetings is quite

necessary. Participation of all ethnicity and community member in EC and committee

is satisfactory, social justice has been found in the resource, distribution. The policies

adopted in CF is regulating to sustain the forest resource distribution and maintaining

social Justice.

7.2 Conclusion

Community Forestry is primarily the only sources of forest products for the

Forest user groups.The demand of Forest Product is not totally addressed by the

Community Forest. i.e. there is high demand of Forest Product and insufficient rate of

supply of the Forest Product. Rich class use sufficient amount of resources as being

the population is less poor category are directly depend upon the Community Forest

for their livelihood. While poor Household lies in the bottom in order to consume the

Community Forest Product. Distribution of Forest Resources in terms of monitory

value is a vast difference in between Wealth-Rank. About equal number of Male and

Female participated in General Assembly in the Community Forest User Group.

There is proper participation of Dalits in committee. About 36% of the women are

present in the Executive Comittee; this shows the mandatory representation of women

in Executive Comittee. Forest User Groups members have equal contribution in

Forest protection and management activities. All the caste/ethnicity has the

proportional representation in Dhalpu Lamatar Community Fprest which Leeds, that

there is commitment on Social Justice.

 68

7.3 Recommendations

1. Increase the attitude, knowledge and awareness level of users. The public

awareness should be given top priority to create greater understanding to

the Forest conservation in equitable and sustainable way.

2. Promotion of IGAS through CF is a key way to promote the livelihood of

poor users while at the same time using the forest more effectively, so

IGAS should be promoted instead of saving CF Funds in bank.

3. The principle of equity through which fairness may be the system and

must be incorporated in the National Forest Policy.

4. The EC members should be elected through election process.

5. Policy and practice should be formulated by holistic approach to cope

against elite monopoly and improve livelihood of the CFUGS.

 69

REFERENCES

Adhikari B. (2001). “Securing right to livelihood, through public land management.

opportunities challenges.” Journal of Forest and Livelihood. Vol. 2 (1). pp:

22-29.

Adhikari B.(2005). “Household characteristics and common property forest use:

complementarities and contradictions.” Journal of Forest and Livelihood, Vol.

2 (1)

Agrawal A.(2001). “Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: context,

methods and politics” politics and society vol.29 (4). Department of political

science, Mc Gill University, Montreal

Chhetri, R.B., Sigdel, H. and Malla, Y. (2001) Country profle report for the forum on

the role of forestry in poverty alleviation: Nepal, Forestry Department- FAO,

September 2001.

Chhetri, R.B., Sigdel, H. and Malla, Y. (2001). Resources of nepal and protected

areas of nepal. Forestry Department – FAO, Dec 2001.

Daniggelis,E. (1997). “Hidden wealth: the survival strategy of foraging farmers in

the upper arun valley eastern Nepal” Mandalla Book point, Kathmandu 1997.

DoF. (1988). “Department of forest: A Brief Profile, Department of Forestry”,

MOFSC, Kathmandu

DoF. (1995). “Department of forest: A Brief Profile, Department of Forestry”,

MOFSC, Kathmandu

Economic Survey (2008), FY 2007/08. Government of Nepal, Ministry of finance.

Fisher, R. J. (1995).“Collaborative management of forest for conservation and

development, issue in forest conservation”, IUCN/ WWF, United Kingdom.

 70

Fisher, R.J. (1989), Indigenous system of common property forest management in

nepal. Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A. Environment and policy Institute.

Gilmour, D.A. and R.J. Fisher (1991) Villagers, forest and foresters: The Philosophy,

process and practice and community forestry in nepal. Centre for development

and the environment, Oslo 1991.

Hobley , M. (1996) Participatory forestry; the process of change in india and nepal.

ODI , London.

IFAD (2003), Leasehold forestry and livestock programme design Document –

inception, international fund for agriculture development, September 2003

(Report No. 1420 – NP).

Jodha N.S (1986) “Common property resources and the rural poor in dry regions of

india”. Economic and political weekly vol.21 (27) pp.169-181

Kanel K.R. and D.R. Nirula (2004), Can rural livelihood be improved in nepal

through community forestry? Banko jankari, vol.14 No.1, Department of

Forest research and survey, MoFSC, Babarmal Kathmandu.

Khatri - Chhetri, A. (2006): “Local institutional and forest product extraction:

evidence from forest management in nepal.” SANDEE working paper No. 16-

06.

Lopez R. (2010) “Sustainable economic development: On the coexistence of

resource-development and resource-impacting industries”. Journal of

Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University press pp:

687-705

Ministry of forest and soil conservation, forest act (1993) and forest regulation 1995.

Ministry of soil and conservation and FINNIDA (1989) Master plan for the forestry

sector.
 71

Ohler, F.M.J. (2000) The impacts of leasehold forestry on livelihoods and

environment, field document 3/2000, hills leasehold forestry and forage

development project. FAO, Kathmandu. IFAD (2003).

Ostrum E. (1992) “Governing the commons:The evolution Of institutions for

collective actions”, Cambridge University Press

Pokharel B.K. (2001) community forestry and livelihood in Nepal.

Roche, N. H. (2001). “Community forestry and its place in the environment of nepal:

Environment Agriculture: biodiversity, agriculture and pollution in south asia

“Nepal UK CF Project Babarmahal, Ecological Society (Ecos) Kathmandu,

Nepal.

Sharma, U.R. (1999) Country Paper-Nepal. In Oil, K.P. (ed.) Collaborative

management of protected areas in the asian region (Proceedings of a

workshop held in May 1998), IUCN-Nepal Kathmandu, 49-57 pp

Sherpa. P, N. Lama P.D. Sherpa (2009) “Indigenous peoples and REED: Challenges

and opportunities in Nepal”, Ready for REDD? Taking stock of experience,

opportunities and challenges in Nepal. Nepal Foresters’ Association,

Kathmandu, Nepal.

Timsina, N.P. 2003, Promoting social justice and conserving montane Forest

Environments: A case study of Nepal’s community forestry programme.

Geographical Journal 169: 236-242.

Timsina N. And H. Luitel (2003) “Equity and social justice in natural resource

management” Forest Resources studies and Action Team (Forest Action).

Ekantakuna, Kathmandu, Nepal

 72

Winrock (2002) Emerging issues in community corestry in nepal. Winrock

International, Kathmandu. Community and Private Forest Division,

Department of Forests (2003), http://www.wrm.org

 1

APPENDICES

ANNEX 1: Interview Schedule

(for women member)

A. Household Information:

V.D.C. Name: ……………. Ward No: …. Village: …………………

Name of Respondents: ……… Age: …….. Education: ………….

Name of Head of Household: …….....................................................

Family Size: ……

Caste..............................

Religion...............................................

Male/Female: ……. Date of Interview: ……………..

1 Questionnaire for Well-being Ranking:

1.1 Do you have land?

a) Yes b) No

1.2 If yes, how much?

………………………………………

1.3 What is the major source of income for your household? Please list the

resources

a) Sales of grain b) vegetables/ fruits

c) Sales of livestock d) occupational work

e) Wage labour f) foreign employment

g) Other (specify) ………

 2

1.4 Income from Agriculture: FY 2066/67

Name of product Selling quantity Local selling price Income

(crops) (in Pathi) (Rs.)
Paddy
Maize
Millet
Wheat
Barley
Potato
Oil seeds
Black grams
Cardamom
Other

grain/vegetable
20 Pathi = 1 Muri

1.5 Do you have livestock?

a) Yes b) No

1.6 If yes, particulars of livestock

Types of Livestock Number

Buffalo
Cow/ox
Goats/ sheep
Pig
Poultry
 3

1.7 Last year income from selling livestock

Types of Livestock Income (Rs.)

Buffalo

Cow/ox

Goats/ sheep

Pig

Poultry

Other animals

1.8 Do you and your family member have any special skill in your occupation? If

yes, what type of skill?

a) Yes b) No

If yes, what type of skill specify ……………………..

1.9 Last year income from occupational work …………………..

1.10 Do you involve in any wage labour?

a) Yes b) No

If yes, list the income from wage labour

No. of involvements in No. of working Wage rate Annual income

wage earning activities days (Rs.)

Male Female Male Female

Total

1.11 Do you and your family members have involved in government services?

a) Yes b) No

If yes, annual income from government services in Rs…...

1.12 Do you have family members involved in foreign employment?

 4

a) Yes b) No

1.13 If yes, income from foreign employment

Name of employer (Country) Annual Income (NRs.)

1.14 Income from other sources (specify)

Types Income

…………… ………………

1.15 Is there self-sufficiency for a food from self production in your household?

a) Yes b) No

If no, how long it is sufficient ………….. Month.

If yes, do you sell the surplus?

a) Yes b) No

1.16 Which material did you use in your house roof?

a) thatch/straw b) bamboo

c) Wood planks d) galvanized tin

e) Others (specify) ………………

1.17 What type of Materials did you use in your house wall?

a) mud/stone b) bamboo/mud

c) Wood planks d) others (specify) ………

1.18 Educational status of family members

Beyond
Sex Illiterate Primary Lower Sec. Secondary
SLC
Male
Female
Total
 5

1.19 Please tell about the following services that your family getting from

Services Type Distance (km/time)

Drinking Water Tap/natural
School LH/HS
Health post SHP/HP/PH Centre
2. Questionnaire for Resource Users

2.1 What is the source of your cooking energy?

a) Firewood b) Kerosene

c) Bio-gas d) Others

2.2 Do you go to CF to collect forest?

a) Yes b) No

2.3 Did you collect NTFPs from CF last year?

a) Yes b) No

If yes, how much (in kg) …………

2.4 Did you use timber for construction purpose last year? If Yes,

Source Quantity (cub-feet)

Community forestry
Private Forest
Other (Specify)
Total

3. Questionnaire for Information about CF

3.1 Has CF programme help IGA, besides forest product?

a) Yes b) No

If yes, how

a) goat-keeping b) pig farming

c) small cottage industry d) training on skill development

e) other (specify)..............................

3.2 Have you taken the loan from FUG fund?

 6

a) Yes b) No

If yes, what did you do with that loan? Specify …………..

3.3 Has it played any significant role in your livelihood?

a) Yes b) No

3.4 What types of knowledge and skill have you gain through CF programme?

Specify …………………………………..

3.6 What do you think the FUG should spend/use its income of fund?

a. Equally distribute to all the users.

b. Spend on forest development activities.

c. Give loan on high interest rate.

d. Spend on community needs.

e. Give priority to the disadvantaged and vulnerable people’s IGAs.

3.7 CF programme is necessary and important for your livelihood?

a) Yes b) No

3.8 Are you satisfied with the activities of CF?

a) More satisfied b) satisfied c) not satisfied

 7

APPENDICES

ANNEX: II Questionnaire for Executive Committee

Name: ………………. Age: …………. Post: …………..

Gender: M/F Education ……….

1.1 When FUG members gather for meetings?

a) Once a month b) once a two month

c) As and when required

1.2 How decision of executive committee is made?

a) Consensus b) Majority

1.3 When the meeting of executive committee held?

a) Once a month b) twice a month c) As and when

required

1.4 What is the condition of Women’s participation in the decision making

process?

a) Good b) Satisfied c) worst

1.5 Do you know where was the FUG fund spent last year?

a) Forest development b) saving c) School support

d) Community building e) IGA g) no activities

1.6 Do you think that CF could be utilized for income generating purpose?

a) Yes, why? ………….. b) No, why? …………..

1.7 How do you collect the fund for the forest management? Have you taken any

financial assistance with any form or organization?

If yes, please specify …………

 8

1.8 Do you know the any conflicts/disputes in your FUG? Please type of conflict

existed in your group?

………………................................................................................................

1.9 What is your opinion about CF programme?

..............................................................................................................................
 9

APPENDICES

ANNEX: III Map of Dhading District

10