Review of Implementation of the Master Plan for the Forestry Sector: Achievements and Lessons
A Synthesis Report
April 2014
The Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation
Singh Durbar, Kathmandu
MPFS Synthesis Report
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword iii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v
1 Introduction & BackGROUND 1
1.1 The MPFS and the Forestry Sector Strategy 1
1.2 Synthesis and Peer Review 1
1.3 MPFS Outline 1
2 MPFS PrOGRAMME Achievements and issues 2
2.1 Community & Private Forestry 2
2.2 National & Leasehold Forestry 2
2.3 Wood-based Industries 3
2.4 Medicinal & Aromatic Plants & Other Minor Forest Products 4
2.5 Soil Conservation & Watershed Management 4
2.6 Conservation of Ecosystems & Genetic Resources 4
2.7 Forest Policy & Legal Reform 5
2.8 Institutional Reform 6
2.9 Human Resources Development (HRD) 7
2.10 Research & Extension 7
2.11 Resource Information & Planning Assistance 8
2.12 Monitoring & Evaluation 8
2.13 Climate Change and Forestry 9
2.14 Gender, Social Inclusion and Poverty Alleviation 9
3 Critical Factors 11
3.1 Factors External to the Forestry Sector 11
3.1.1 Political change 11
3.1.2 Economic change 11
3.1.3 Demographic change 11
3.1.4 Communications and infrastructure 11
3.1.5 Other influential policies and laws 12
3.2 Forestry Sector Factors 12
3.2.1 Institutional modalities 12
3.2.2 Forestry sector finance 12
3.2.3 International development partners 13
3.3 International Factors 13
3.3.1 Nepal’s international commitments 13
3.3.2 International best practice 13
4 Lessons Learnt 15
4.1 Lessons for the Management and Utilization of Forest Resources and Conserving Biodiversity 15
4.2 Lessons for the Policy and Legal Framework 16
4.3 Lessons for Forest Sector Institutions 17
4.4 Lessons for the Forestry Sector’s Contribution to Economic Development 19
4.5 Lessons for Addressing Poverty and Social Exclusion 20
4.6 Lessons for Nepal’s Climate Change Agenda 20
5 Future directions and Options 22
5.1 The nature of Nepal’s forestry sector strategy 22
5.2 Forestry sector governance and administration 22
5.3 Management of Forest Resources 23
5.4 Forest sector contribution to economic development 24
5.5 Forestry sector contribution to social inclusion and poverty reduction 24
5.6 Forest biodiversity and environmental conservation 25
5.7 Forestry sector response to climate change 25
6 Conclusion 26
6.1 Sustainable management of forest resources 26
6.2 Resource tenure and people's rights 26
6.3 Employment and economic growth 27
6.4 Partnership and collaboration among state, civil society and the private sector 27
Annex 1 – Master Plan for the ForestRY Sector (Outline) 28
Annex 2 – MPFS IMPlementation and Achievements matrix 31
Annex 3 – Nepal’s International Commitments 41
Annex 4 – A framework for forestry SectoR governance 42
Foreword
The Master Plan for the Forestry Sector (MPFS), 1988-2011 has been the major forest policy framework for conservation and management of Nepal’s forests for the last 25 years. Over this period and until the end of the MPFS in July 2011 there have been significant political, economic and environmental changes in the country. The forestry sector itself has faced a number of unfolding challenges and opportunities, resulting from changes within and outside the sector, the country as well as globally. Such issues demanded a comprehensive review of the MPFS as a basis for a new, more relevant and innovative strategy for the future. Realizing this Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation (MFSC) undertook a thorough review of MPFS as a step in the preparation of the new Forestry Sector Strategy (FSS).
Several government and non-government organizations, associations, agencies, and persons contributed to the entire review process, and MFSC highly values and appreciates their support. MFSC would also like to extend its sincere thanks to Multi-Stakeholder Forestry Program (MSFP) and Hariyo Ban Program for supporting the review process.
MFSC would like to thank the team involved in reviewing MPFS and preparing the FSS for their sincere efforts in producing this report. MFSC acknowledges the sincere effort of Joint Secretary Mr. Ram Prasad Lamsal in coordinating the whole effort. MFSC would also like to extend its appreciation to Dr. Keshav Raj Kanel, Dr. Dhruba Prasad Acharya, Dr. Binod Bhatta, Dr. Bharat Kumar Pokhrel, Ms. Madhu Ghimire, Mr. Nav Raj Baral and Mr. Peter Branney for their respective contributions in shaping this report.
MFSC would also like to recognize Mr. Krishna Prasad Acharya, Joint Secretary, MFSC; Dr. Bishwa Nath Oli, Director General, Department of Forests; Resham Bahadur Dangi, Deputy Director General, Department of Forests; Mr. Pem Kandel, Director General, Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management; Dr. Maheshwar Dhakal, Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation; Mr. Hasta Bahadur Thapa, Department of Forest Research and Survey; Mr. Ram Nandan Sah, Mr. Tirtha Raj Joshi, Dr. Anuj Sharma and Mr. Bishal Ghimire from Department of Forests, for their support and assistance in the process.
MFSC would also acknowledge the contribution of Mr. Yajna Nath Dahal, Mr. Kumud Shrestha, Dr. Jaggannath Joshi, Mr. Pashupati Nath Koirala, Mr. Krishna Prasad Osti, Mr. Dil Raj Khanal, Dr. Bikram Tamang, Ms. Sangita Bista, Mr. Nagendra Regmi, and Mr. Injun Acharya, for collecting required data and preparing an initial draft of various sectoral program reports of MPFS. MFSC also thanks Ms. Dibya Gurung for her input in the GESI section of review report, and Ms. Surabhi Pudaseni for her contribution in editing this report.
MFSC would like to extend its sincere appreciation to Office of the Auditor General, Ministry of Finance, Financial Comptroller General Office, all departments of MFSC, Timber Corporation of Nepal (TCN), Forest Products Development Board (FPDB), Herbs Production and Processing Company Limited (HPPCL), Trade and Export Promotion Center (TEPC), Singhadurbar Vaidyakhana, Gorkha Ayurved Company, Agro Enterprise Center of Federation of Nepalese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (AEC-FNCCI) and Nepal Herbs and Herbal Products Association (NEHHPA) for providing highly needed data and information relevant to the review.
Furthermore, MFSC would also like to thank various institutions and professional associations, including Nepal Forester’s Association (NFA), Federation of Community Forest Users in Nepal (FECOFUN), Association of Collaborative Forest Users of Nepal (ACOFUN), Nepalese Federation of Forest Resource User Group (NEFUG), Himalayan Grassroots Women’s Natural Resources Management Association Nepal (HIMAWANTI-Nepal), Federation of Forest Based Industry and Trade, Nepal (FenFIT), Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN), Dalit Alliance for Natural Resources (DANAR) and National Forum for Advocacy Nepal (NAFAN) for their inputs in the review process.
Lastly, MFSC would like to extend its sincere appreciation to all individuals and organizations that have contributed directly or indirectly to the process of preparing this report.
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
BZMG / Buffer Zone Management GroupCF / Community Forest
CFUG / Community Forest Users Group
DFO / District Forest Officer
DFRS / Department of Forest Research and Survey
DFSP / District Forest Sector Plan
DoF / Department of Forests
DSCWM / Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management
EIA / Environmental Impact Assessment
EPA / Environment Protection Act
FLEG-T / Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade
FPDB / Forest Products Development Board
FSCC / Forestry Sector Coordination Committee
FSS / Forestry Sector Strategy
GDP / Gross Domestic Product
GESI / Gender, Equity and Social Inclusion
GIS / Geographical Information System
GoN / Government of Nepal
HPPCL / Herbs Production and Processing Company Limited
HR / Human Resources
HRD / Human Resources Development
IT / Information Technology
LAPA / Local Adaptation Plan of Action
M&E / Monitoring and Evaluation
MAP / Medicinal and Aromatic Plant
MEA / Multi-lateral Environmental Agreement
MFSC / Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation
MIS / Management Information System
MPFS / Master Plan for the Forestry Sector
NAPA / National Adaptation Plan Of Action
NFC / Nepal Fuelwood Corporation
NGO / Non-Governmental Organization
NRS / Nepali Rupees
NTFP / Non-Timber Forest Product
PA / Protected Area
PES / Payment for Ecological Services
PRSP / Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
REDD+ / Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation
SWAP / Sector Wide Approach
SWC / Soil and Watershed Conservation
TCN / Timber Corporation of Nepal
TFAP / Tropical Forest Action Plan
VAT / Value Added Tax
VDC / Village Development Committee
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Master Plan for the Forestry Sector (MPFS), prepared in 1986-88, ended in July 2011. It is soon to be replaced by a new Forestry Sector Strategy (FSS). Implementation of the MPFS has resulted in many achievements, opportunities and challenges. These have been reviewed and documented in a series of papers prepared by national researchers and consultants using a process of information analysis, literature review, consultation workshops and interviews with key informants. This synthesis document is based on these detailed reviews and provides a concise summary of their main points and findings as a contribution to the preparation of a new FSS.
The MPFS itself was structured around 6 Primary Development Programs and 6 Supportive Programs each with a specific aim. These programs were separately analyzed and their achievements, implementation issues and main gaps were identified in these reviews.
Amongst the 6 primary development programs, the Community and Private Forestry Program had significant impact and largely achieved its aims. Community Forestry has contributed to halting forest loss and degradation (especially in the Middle Hills) and has enhanced the livelihoods of the large numbers of rural people. Main issues were the limited impact that community forestry has had on rural employment and the local economy and the general under-utilization of community forests as well as erosion of the legal autonomy of forestry groups by a series of administrative orders and other decisions that have hindered better forest utilization and growth of forest-based enterprises. By contrast the National and Leasehold Forestry Program made more limited progress. Although leasehold forestry which evolved into Pro-Poor Leasehold Forestry has been a successful approach (albeit on a relatively small scale) other components including lease of national forest for commercial management by private operators and implementation of sustainable forest management by state agencies has not taken place. As a result many remaining areas of unmanaged national forest suffer from degradation and deforestation (especially in the Tarai and High Mountains). Collaborative Forest Management as a potential approach for this is not yet fully operational or effective and Nepal’s wood production is still unsystematic without planned involvement or investment by the private sector. There is a thriving trade in illicit timber and ongoing threats to unmanaged national forests come from infrastructure development and urban expansion as well as open access for grazing and encroachment. The Program for Wood-based Industries has achieved very little. A huge gap still exists between demand and supply for wood and market-led economic liberalization policies for timber and other wood products were not effectively pursued as planned. Consequently the assured supply of forest products needed to sustain and enhance Nepal’s forest based industry does not yet exist although increasing supplies of raw materials are coming from sustainably managed community and private forests. Main issues include over-regulation and frequent policy changes as well as interference by other agencies e.g. police, local government etc. and promotion of timber imports. These all affect the allocation of forests and the harvest, sale and transport of forest products. This in turn creates disincentives to legitimate private investment and sustains an illegal forest product trade. Similarly the Medicinal & Aromatic Plants & Other Minor Forest Products Program has had only limited success. Although there is now much greater awareness, interest and grass-roots experience of enterprises based on these products and many rural communities and households are involved in some way, the sub-sector is still characterized by unsupportive and restrictive regulations, taxes and procedures that, coupled with inadequate phyto-sanitary and testing facilities to support international trade, adversely affect the establishment and management of such enterprises. NTFPs/MAPs-based enterprises remain small and fragile and there is only limited private investment with few products reaching international markets. Beneficiaries tend to be middle-men and traders rather than rural households and some higher value products suffer from illegal trading. There has been moderate success with the Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Program, which, even though it did not achieve its physical targets resulted in some important impacts – especially in specific localities. However, physical achievements of this program are relatively insignificant compared with the actual requirements for soil and watershed conservation across the country – especially as these are exacerbated by climate change effects, rural road construction and haphazard collection of building materials from river courses. A specific policy on watershed conservation lacking and there is only limited coordination between MFSC and other agencies such as local government, civil society and community groups and between MFSC and other ministries. The Conservation of Ecosystems & Genetic Resources Program has been relatively successful and there is now a network of protected areas (PAs) contributing to conservation of ecosystems and biodiversity and covering 23% of the country’s land area. Populations of several charismatic species such as tiger, rhino and wild buffalo have increased although many other species (especially birds) are in decline. Conservation policies have moved away from 'people exclusionary' and 'species focused' towards 'people-cantered’ approaches and buffer zone management groups have enabled local people to benefit from PAs. In popular national parks visitor numbers and revenues have increased significantly. Main issues include a shortage of specialized staff and a contested legal framework for PAs (including processes of PA declaration, governance, power sharing, equity and benefit-sharing). Increased visitor numbers combined with infrastructure development have had adverse effects at certain locations and human wildlife conflicts have increased. Illegal trade and wildlife poaching has not been effectively controlled despite the engagement of the Nepal Army. Climate change and infrastructure development are adversely affecting biodiversity conservation.
Of the 6 supportive programs of MPFS the Forest Policy & Legal Reform Program has proved to be highly critical. With successful policy and legal reform, individual programs under MFSP have tended to be successful but where such reforms have not been made or implemented affected programs have been far less successful. The Forest Sector Policy (1989) (included in the MPFS) and the Forest Act (1993) are considered as having been amongst the most influential, innovative and far-sighted elements of the MPFS and policy directions determined by MPFS and the subsequent legal reforms made a significant contribution to shaping the direction of Nepal’s forestry sector and the institutions operating within it. However, there have been important challenges including: