Downloaded 40 times
Uploaded byPROCASUR Corporation
Leasehold forestry in Nepal over two decades of implementation
Leasehold forestry in Nepal aims to improve the livelihoods of poor households while restoring degraded forests by granting leasehold forest management to small groups. Key features include community-led management, regulatory oversight by district forest officers, and capacity-building initiatives for sustainable resource use. The program has successfully increased income, reduced poverty, and enhanced ecological conditions, while also empowering women and marginalized groups through active participation.
In this document
Powered by AI
Overview of Leasehold Forestry in Nepal, highlighting over two decades of implementation.
Importance due to livelihoods, limited income options, degraded forests, soil erosion, and women's workload.
Description of LFUG, characteristics including size and composition, and leasehold forestry management.
Profile data including CFUGs, households, and areas managed under leasehold forestry.
Community participation for resource increase, targeting beneficiaries like the poor and women.
Steps in LFUG formation, coordination strategies, and participatory approaches in implementation.
Major interventions including trust-building, social mobilization, and plantation management.
Outcomes such as improved forest conditions, livestock production, and increased forage availability.
Stats showing improvements in livestock health and savings, along with income-generating activities.
Various awards acknowledging achievements in mountain development and environmental efforts.
Policy establishment and implementation, with focus on inclusion and empowerment of marginalized groups.
Networking benefits, biodiversity improvements, and control over soil erosion.
Key lessons on restoration, resource management, and cooperation with local stakeholders.
Potential for program extension, development opportunities, and contribution to climate change adaptation.
Closing remarks and gratitude for participation in the presentation.
More Related Content
Similar to Leasehold forestry in Nepal over two decades of implementation
More from PROCASUR Corporation
Leasehold forestry in Nepal over two decades of implementation
- 1. Leasehold Forestry inNepal: Over Two Decades of Implementation
- 2. Why Leasehold Forestryin Rural Areas? • Agriculture, livestock and forestry main stay of livelihood • Limited opportunities for additional income and employment in rural areas • Out migration of people in search of income and employment • Significant areas of degraded forests • Soil erosion due to heavy soil working (cultivation of annual crops) in hill slopes • Increased women drudgery due to loss of forests – spending hours for collection of firewood, fodder Need to balance between environmental improvement and the needs of the people
- 3. Leasehold Forest UserGroup • Leasehold Forest User Group (LFUG) is a small group of 5 to 15 poor households recognized by the District Forest Office for the management and utilization of the Leasehold Forest.
- 4. Characteristics of LFUG • Small group of 5 – 15 HHs • Involvement of only resource poor HHs • Homogenous group having similar well being status
- 5. Leasehold Forestry Leaseholdforestry is a participatory model of forest management where part of the national forest (degraded) is given to the group of poor households aiming to raise their income and improve living condition simultaneously improving the ecological condition of the hills
- 6. Characteristics of LeaseholdForestry • Land belongs to the government • Management and utilization of LF by the LFUG/HH • Regulation of LF by LFUG and DFO • District Forest Officer approves the operational plan of LF and issues a lease certificate • Possibility of extension of lease period by another 40 yrs
- 7. Leasehold Forestry Profile • Total number of CFUGs = 7,419 • Total number of households involved = 75,021 HH • Total area of LF handed over = 42,835 ha. • Average size of LFUG = 10.1 HH • Average size of the LF = 5.8 ha • Average LF area per household = 0.6 ha. • Percent of women in the Key position = 39 Source: LFLP (as of 1st Nov 2014)
- 8. Geographical Coverage ofthe Programme
- 9. Conceptual Model ofLeasehold Forestry Community participation in Restoration of forests for increased resources Poor and Vulnerable People Degraded Forest Increase capacities and governance Restore forests with multiple products Increase income and reduce vulnerability Sustainable supply of forest products and env. services Reduce HH poverty Better management of forest land Increase forest products supply for capital formation
- 10. Target Beneficiaries •People living below the poverty line • Women headed households • Hardcore Poor of any caste/ethnicity – Landless or near landless
- 11. LFUG Formation andLF Hand CF Implementation Process Over Process Review and Revision Monitoring & Evaluation Feedback Implementation OP approval by DFO Joint signature (DFO & Chairperson of LFUG) Forest & User Identification User Group Formation Constitution Preparation LFUG Registration Operational Plan Preparation (LIP included) Forests Handover HH Visit Group Meeting •Group Meeting Well Being Ranking • Approval by DFO Household Survey Group Level Information Collection Forest demarcation Forest Resource Inventory Group Meeting Training/Study tour Technical support Financial /Material Support Participatory Resource Mapping
- 12. Strategic Approach •Coordination approach – Coordination and collaboration with other development agencies • Participatory Approach – Involvement of whole community in site selection – Identification of poor households through well being ranking – Involvement of poor households in the decision making process • Process Approach – Learning by doing • Integrated Approach – Forests – Livestock – Rural Finance
- 13. Strategic Approach…. •Social mobilization – Group Promoters from LFUGs • Livelihood planning – Household level – LFUG level • Joint planning and monitoring – Participatory planning and monitoring – Joint monitoring • Crop/product diversification to minimize the risk – Forage cultivation to broom grass cultivation to NTFPs cultivation to multipurpose tree species plantation – Forage to broom, paper pulp to fruits, bark, leaf to NTFPs to fruit
- 14. Major Interventions •Trust building through social mobilization • Group formation/networking • Institutional strengthening (accounting/ bookkeeping, leadership, gender and social inclusion coaching/training) • Support production and distribution of planting materials • Plantation along contour using SALT (Forage, fodder, multipurpose tree speceis)
- 15. Major Interventions… •Plantation of other tree species (multipurpose) from second year onward – Cinnamomum tamala – Fraxinus floribunda – Ficus glaberrima – Alnus nepalensis – Zanthoxylum armatum – Leucaena leucocephala – Bauhinia purpuria • On site coaching on plantation management (plantation, weeding, harvesting) to both men and women of each household • Protection of natural regeneration
- 16. Major Interventions… •Livestock management • Animal health services • Rural finance institution establishment and strengthening • Coordination and collaboration with other agencies
- 17.
- 18. Degraded Forests convertedto Productive Forests
- 19. Degraded Forests beforeintervention
- 20. Degraded Forests afterintervention
- 21. Degraded Forests afterintervention
- 22. • Production offorage and fodder increased tremendously – Demand of large animals
- 23. • Livestock productionincreased through improved animal health services (from 58 percent of HHs in 2010 to 71 percent of HHs in 2013 ) • Increased annual income from livestock (from 60 percent HHs in 2010 to 70 percent HHs in 2013) • Average number of goats per HH increased from 3.12 in 2006 to 5 in 2010 to 6.12 in 2013)
- 24. • LFUGs andCooperatives established as rural finance institution (56 cooperatives) —LFUGs members involved in monthly saving increased from 28 percent in 2006 to 91 percent in 2013 — 77 percent of saving amount mobilized in productive activities •Social mobilization services build capacity of LFUGs (95 percent of LFUGs have record keeping system in place)
- 25. Capacity of women,Dalits and the poor enhanced through social mobilization
- 27. Fodder collection timereduced by 2.5 hrs. per/day
- 28. • Income povertyof LFUG members reduced through various income generating activities
- 29. • Resources generationthrough coordination and collaboration with other development partners
- 30. • Livelihood ofthe poor improved through enterprise development Women Entrepreneurs Making Incense Sticks Bio-briquette Enterprises
- 32. Bagged with severalawards • Mountain development awards with cash prize – Kauledanda LFUG intergroup, Jhirubas, Palpa (2010) – Hupsekot LFUG intergroup, Hupsekot, Nawalparasi (2011) – Grihakot LFUG intergroup, Chitrebhanjyang Syangja (2012) • Environment development award – Aamdanda LFUG intergroup, Devghat, Tanahun (2012) • Letter of appreciation from Palpa District Development Committee
- 33. Policy Implication •Leasehold forestry policy in place • Leasehold forestry introduced inside community forestry • Government continued programme without external resources • Leasehold forestry Priority One programme of the government • Adoption by other projects and programmes • Separate division established under Department of Forests
- 34. Gender and SocialInclusion • Both man and woman from each household are member of the group • Involvement of women, Dalits and Janajati has increased – Women in key position (39%) – Dalit in key position (13%) – Janajati in Key position (56%)
- 35. Other Implication •Networking of the groups in cluster and district federation • Poorest upgraded to poorer and poorer to poor category • Biodiversity increment in the leasehold forests • Soil erosion controlled to a large extent due to increase in green coverage
- 36. Key Learning •Degraded forests can be restored in partnership with forest dependent poor. • Intervention is needed at package level: Resource generation to utilization and marketing. • Diversification of the products secures investment. • Local Resource Persons are important for sustainability. • Savings and Credit Scheme, even at low scale, benefits poor for income generating activities and for vulnerability coping. • Strong coordination between development partners is also key to the success. • Livelihood improvement planning best tool for resource pooling
- 37. Opportunities and Challenges • Ever increasing demands for the extension of the programme in neighboring VDCs and districts • Extension of the programme in other districts and other areas in the same district as potential land (shifting cultivation and degraded forests) available there • Possibilities of resources generation through resource pooling • Possibilities of enterprise development with increased production of forage, fodder and NTFPs • Many species having multiple benefits available to grow that fetch high price • Potential model to contribute in mitigation and adaptation of climate change effects
- 38.