Advertisement

Environmental Management

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 48–61 | Cite as

Forest Cover Change, Physiography, Local Economy, and Institutions in a Mountain Watershed in Nepal

  • Ambika P. Gautam
  • Ganesh P. Shivakoti
  • Edward L. Webb
Research

Abstract

This study assessed changes in forest cover in a mountain watershed in central Nepal between 1976 and 2000 by comparing classified satellite images coupled by GIS analyses, and examined the association of forest change with major physiographic, economic, and local forest governance parameters. The results showed an increase in forested area (forest plus shrublands) by 7.6% during 1976–2000. Forest dynamism (changes including improvement, deterioration, gain, and loss) was highest in low-elevation, south-facing and less-steep slopes that were closer to roads. Proportionately the highest net improvement and gain to forested area also took place in those locations. Forest degradation occurred at twice the rate of improvement in high elevation areas (> 2300 m). Forests located in urban and semiurban areas (i.e., a market-oriented economy) experienced a proportionately higher amount of net improvement and gain than forests in rural areas (i.e., a subsistence economy). Among the three governance arrangements, proportionately the highest net improvement and gain took place in semigovernment forests (forested area legally under the forest department but with de facto control and claim of ownership by local communities and/or municipality) followed by formalized community forests (including leasehold). Government forests, which were mostly found in the southern high mountains and had virtually open access, remained relatively stable during the study period. Over 50% of the watershed forests have not come under community-based management despite favorable policy and more than two decades of government intervention with continuous donor support. The findings indicate that the present “one size fits all” approach of community forest handover policy in Nepal needs rethinking to accommodate biophysical and socioeconomic variations across the country.

Keywords

Land cover changes Remote sensing GIS Institutions Land tenure Nepal 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Financial support for this research was provided by DANIDA through a doctoral research grant to Ambika Gautam under the Integrated Watershed Development and Management program of the Asian Institute of Technology, ANUTECH Pty Ltd., Australia, through the Nepal Australia Community Resource Management Project, and a MacArthur postdoctoral research grant made available to Ambika Gautam through The Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University. We thank the Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change at Indiana University for sharing Landsat satellite imagery from 1976. The authors would also like to thank Dr. Charles M. Schweik, University of Massachusetts, and two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on an earlier version of this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Agrawal, A., Ostrom, E. 2001Collective action, property rights, and decentralization in resource use in India and Nepal.Politics & Society29485514Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, J. 2000Four considerations for decentralized forest management: subsidiarity, empowerment, pluralism and social capital.Enters, T.Durst, P. B.Victor, M. eds. Decentralization and devolution of forest management in Asia and the Pacific.RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1Bangkok, Thailand1122Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bajracharya, D. 1983Fuel, food or forest? Dilemmas in a Nepali village.World Development1110571074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Banerjee, A. K. 2000Devolving forest management in Asia-Pacific countries. Enters, T.Durst, P. B.Victor, M. eds. Decentralization and devolution of forest management in Asia and the Pacific.RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1Bangkok, Thailand3952Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bartlett, A. G. 1992A review of community forestry advances in Nepal.Commonwealth Forestry Review7195100Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown, S. 1993Tropical forests and global carbon cycle: the need for sustainable land-use patterns.Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment463144Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dinerstein, E. 1998. A biodiversity assessment and gap analysis of the Himalayas. In Report on the International Meeting on Himalaya Ecoregional Co-operation, 16–18 February 1998, Kathmandu, Nepal. The United Nations Development Programme, pp. 157–161Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dongol, C. M., Hughey, K. F. D., Bigsby, H. R. 2002Capital formation and sustainable community forestry in Nepal.Mountain Research and Development227077Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    ESCAP (Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific). 1997. Guidelines and manual on land-use planning and practices in watershed management and disaster reduction. ESCAP, United Nations, vii + 133 pp.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations). 1997. Implementing sustainable forest management in Asia and the Pacific. Proceedings of a Regional Expert Consultation, Bangkok, 12–15 December 1995. RAP Publication: 1997/7. FAO, RAP, Bangkok, xiii + 246 pp.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fisher, R. J., Durst, P. B., Enters, T., Victor, M. 2000Overview of themes and issues in devolution and decentralization of forest management in Asia and the Pacific.Enters, T.Durst, P. B.Victor, M. eds. Decentralization and devolution of forest management in Asia and the PacificRECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1Bangkok, ThailandvixiGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fox, J., Krummel, J., Yarnasarn, S., Ekasingh, M., Podger, N. 1995Land use and landscape dynamics in Northern Thailand: Assessing change in three upland watersheds.Ambio243281334Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gautam, A. P., 2002. Forest land use dynamics and community-based institutions in a mountain watershed in Nepal: Implications for forest governance and management. PhD dissertation. Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand, xi + 174 pp.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gautam, A. P., Webb, E. L. 2001Species diversity and forest structure of pine plantations in the Middle Hills of Nepal.Banko Jankari1113121Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gautam, A. P., Webb, E. L., Eiumnoh, A. 2002GIS assessment of land use/land cover changes associated with community forestry implementation in the Middle Hills of Nepal.Mountain Research and Development226369Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gibson, C., McKean, M. A., Ostrom, E. 2000People and forests: communities, institutions, and governance.The MIT PressCambridge, Massachusettsxxiv + 274 ppGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gilmour, D. A., Fisher, R. J. 1991Villagers, forests and foresters.Sahayogi PressKathmandu, Nepalxxiii +212 ppGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    HMGN (His Majesty’s Government of Nepal). 1995. Forest Regulation, 1995 (official translation). HMGN, Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, 24 pp.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ICIMOD (International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development). 1994. Application of GIS in rural development planning in Nepal. MENRIS Case Study Series No. 2, ICIMOD, Kathmandu, Nepal, 84 pp.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jackson, J. K. 1994Manual of afforestation in Nepal, 2 Vol.Forest Research and Survey CentreKathmandu, Nepalxvi + 824 ppGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jackson, W. J., Nurse, M. C., Chhetri, R. B. 1993High altitude forests in the Middle Hills: can they be managed as community forests?Banko Janakari42023Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jackson, W. J., Tamrakar, R. M., Hunt, S., Shepherd, K. R. 1998Land-use changes in two Middle Hill districts of Nepal.Mountain Research and Development18193212Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    JTRCF (Joint Technical Review of Community Forestry). 2001. JTRCF: Report of the Joint Technical Review Committee. Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal, ix + 48 pp.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kammerbauer, J., Ardon, C. 1999Land use dynamics and landscape change pattern in a typical watershed in the hillside region of central Honduras.Agriculture. Ecosystems and Environment75931100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kanel, K. R. 1997Community forestry: implications for watershed management. Khenmark, C. B.Thaiuts, L.Puangchit, L.Thammincha, S. eds. Proceedings of the FORTROP’ 96: Tropical Forestry in the 21st Century, 25–28 November 1996.Kasetsart UniversityBangkok, Thailand146171Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kumar, N. 2000All is not green with JFM in India.Forest, Trees and People Newsletter4246150Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ligon, E., Narain, U. 1999Government management of village commons: comparing two forest policies.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management372721289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mahat, T. B. S., Griffin, D. M., Shepherd, K. R. 1986Human impact on some forests of the Middle Hills of Nepal, Part 2. Some major human impacts before 1950 on forests of Sidhu Palchok and Kabhre Palanchok.Mountain Research and Development63251334Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nagendra, H. 2002Tenure and forest conditions: community forestry in the Nepal Terai.Environmental Conservation29530539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Phuong, P. X. 2000People’s participation in forest management in Vietnam.Enters, T.Durst, P. B.Victor, M. eds. Decentralization and devolution of forest management in Asia and the Pacific.RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1Bangkok, Thailand8793Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pravongviengkham, P. P. 2000A national advocacy for a holistic and decentralized approach to forest management in Lao PDR.Enters, T.Durst, P. B.Victor, M. eds. Decentralization and devolution of forest management in Asia and the Pacific.RECOFTC Report No. 18 and RAP Publication 2000/1Bangkok, Thailand7586Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pokharel, B. K. 1997. Foresters and villagers in contention and compact. PhD dissertation University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, vi + 426 pp.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Richards, J. A. 1994Remote sensing digital image analysis: an introduction. 2, revised and enlarged ed.Springer-VerlagBerlin340Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schreier, H., Brown, S., Schmidt, M., Shah, P., Shrestha, B., Nakarmi, G., Subba, K., Wymann, S. 1994Gaining forest but losing ground: a GIS evaluation in a Himalayan watershed.Environmental Management18139150Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schweik, C. M., Adhikari, K., Pandit, K. N. 1997Land cover change and forest institutions: a comparison of two sub-basins in the southern Siwalik Hills of Nepal.Mountain Research and Development17991116Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Singh, B. K., and B. B. Shrestha. 2000. Status of leasehold groups and leasehold sites. RAPR: GCP/NEP/052/NET, Field Document 05/2000, Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Kathmandu, 34 pp.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sterk, A. 1998. Leasing degraded forest land: An innovative way to integrate forest and livestock development in Nepal. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand, 49 pp.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tekle, K., Hedlund, L. 2000Land cover changes between 1958 and 1986 in Kalu district, Southern Wello, Ethiopia.Mountain Research and Development204251Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Teillet, P. M., Guindon, B., Goodenough, D. G. 1982On the slope-aspect correction of multi-spectral scanner data.Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing8841106Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Varughese G. 1999. Villagers, bureaucrats, and forests in Nepal: Designing governance for a complex resource. PhD thesis. Indiana University, Indiana, xii + 229 pp.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Varughese, G., Ostrom, E. 2001The contested role of heterogeneity in collective action: some evidences from community forestry in Nepal.World Development29747765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Virgo, K. J., Subba, K. J. 1994Land-use change between 1978 and 1990 in Dhankuta District, Koshi Hills, Eastern Nepal.Mountain Research and Development141591170Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Webb, E. L., Gautam, A. P. 2001Effects of community forest management on the structure and diversity of a successional broadleaf forest in Nepal.International Forestry Review3146157Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Webb, E. L., Khurshid, M. 2000Divergent destinies among pine forests in northern Pakistan: linking ecosystem characteristics with community self-governance and local institutions.International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology71891200Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ambika P. Gautam
    • 1
  • Ganesh P. Shivakoti
    • 1
  • Edward L. Webb
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Environment, Resources and DevelopmentAsian Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 4 Klong Luang Pathum Thani 12120Thailand

Personalised recommendations