Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

REDD+, forest transition, agrarian change and ecosystem services in the hills of Nepal

  • Published:
Human Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The REDD+ literature in Nepal in its assessment of the likely impacts of REDD+ has paid little attention to the drivers behind the increasing forest cover and the changing role of forests in Nepal’s rural economy. This paper explores how changes in the agrarian economy in the Nepalese Mid-Hills have had locally specific effects on forest area, agricultural practices and ecosystem service (ES) provision and use. The contribution of agriculture to rural livelihoods has declined in many locations, and in parallel, the demands on community forests have changed. However, pockets of subsistence agriculture are likely to remain in the hills and these will remain dependent on forest-related ES provision. REDD+’s formulaic approach to forests and carbon sequestration fails to address the question of how forests in different contexts can support sustainable agriculture. The findings draw on field observation and interviews with officials and organisations, forest user groups, forest users and small-scale farmers in Dolakha and Chitwan districts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There are four distinct levels of hierarchy in the caste system in which Brahmin and Chhetri and ethnic groups are in the order of first, second and third respectively. The Dalit are in the last and are so-called un-touchable.

  2. In the case of making the same assessment in absolute monitory terms, the vast majority of the households would have been classified as poor.

  3. In this calculation Chitwan national park has been included in the total forest area, without the national park forest area the number would be 42%.

  4. Dates of community forest handover to the CFUGs vary within and between districts. In Dolakha many community forests were handed over in early 1990s but in Chitwan community forests were handed over relatively later (i.e., late 1990s or even later).

  5. There was only one exception and that was CFUG-Do:9, that stated that they initially logged too much when they took over their community forest and then replanted it mainly with pine, and as a result their forest has not recovered as they planned.

  6. During the drier part of the year the leaseholder forests do not provide enough fodder and the farmers then collect fodder in the community forest areas instead.

References

  • Adhikari, B., Di Falco, S., and Lovett, J. C. (2004). Household characteristics and forest dependency: evidence from common property forest management in Nepal. Ecological Economics 48: 245–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adhikari, B., Williams, F., and Lovett, J. C. (2007). Local benefits from community forests in the middle hills of Nepal. Forest Policy and Economics 9: 464–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alden Wily, L., Chapagain, D., and Sharma, S. (2009). Land Reform in Nepal: Where is it Coming From and Where is it Going? Findings of a Scoping Study on Land Reform for DFID Nepal. Kathmandu Department for International Development (DFID) Nepal.

  • Bajracharya, D. (1983). Fuel, food or forest? Dilemmas in a Nepali village. World Development 11: 1057–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bampton, J. F. R., Ebregt, A., and Bangade, M. R. (2007). Collaborative forest management in Nepal's Terai: policy, practice and contestation. Journal of Forest and Livelihood 6: 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaikie, P., Cameron, J., and Seddon, D. (2002). Understanding 20 years of change in West-Central Nepal: Continuity and change in lives and ideas. World Development 30: 1255–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buizer, M., Humphreys, S., and de Jong, W. (2014). Climate change and deforestation: the evolution of an intersecting policy domain. Environmental Science & Policy 35: 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byres, T. J. (1995). Political Economy, Agrarian Question and Comparative Method. Economic and Political Weekly 30: 507–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). (2011). Nepal Living Standard Survey 2010/2011. Central Bureau for Statistics. Kathmandu.

  • Chitwan DFO. (2013). Leasehold Forestry Annual report. District Forest Office, Chitwan.

  • Culas, R. J. (2013). REDD and forest transition: Tunneling through the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecological Economics: 44–51.

  • DFCC. (2011). District forest sector plan. In District forest sector plan. District Forest Coordination Committee, Dolakha.

  • Dhakal, B., Bigsby, H., and Cullen, R. (2010). Forests for Food Security and Livelihood Sustainability: Policy Problems and Opportunities for Small Farmers in Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 35.

  • Fox, J. (1993). Forest Resources in a Nepali Village in 1980 and 1990: The Positive Influence of Population Growth. Mountain Research and Development 13.

  • Gautam, A. P. (2003). Land use dynamics and landscape change pattern in a mountain watershed in Nepal. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 99: 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godar, J., Tizado, E. J., and Pokorny, B. (2012). Who is responsible for the deforestation in the Amazon? A spatially explicit analysis along the Tranzamazon Highway in Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management 267: 58–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICIMOD. (2014). Mountain GeoPortal. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development ICIMOD. http://www.geoportal.icimod.org.

  • ICIMOD, ANSAB, and FECOFUN. (2010). Report on Forest Carbon Stock in Community Forest of three Watersheds (Ludikhola, Kayarkhola and Charnawati). Asia Network for Sustainable Agriculture and Bioresources. Kathmandu.

  • Jaquet, S., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Derron, M.-H., and Jaboyedoff, M. (2013). Forest cover and landslide trends: A case study from Dolakha District in central-eastern Nepal, 1992–2009. In eds. F G Renaud, K Sudmeier-Rieux and M Estrella. The role of ecosystems in disaster risk reduction. United Nations University Press.

  • Khatri, D. B., Gurung, N., Adhikari, B., and Pain, A. (2015). The Production of Landslides Risks and Local Responses: A Case Study of Bhirkot, Dolakha District of Nepal. Case Study Report. ForestAction Nepal and Southasia Institute for Advanced Studies. Kathmandu.

  • Khatri, D. B., Marquardt, K., Ojha, H., and Pain, A. (submitted). Strengthening or paralysing decentralized forest governance? A case of REDD+ piloting in Nepalese community forests. Manuscript submitted to Forest Policy and Economics.

  • Korhonen-Kurki, K., Sehring, J., Brockhaus, M., and Di Gregorio, M. (2014). Enabling factors for establishing REDD+ in a context of weak governance. Climate Policy 14:167–186. doi:10.1080/14693062.2014.852022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LRMP. (1986). Land Systems, Land Utilization and Agriculture Forestry Reports. Land Resources Mapping Project Kenting Earth Sciences Ltd. Ottawa, Canada.

  • Mahat, T. B. S., Griffin, D. M., and Shepherd, K. R. (1987). Human Impacts on Some Forests of the Middle Hills of Nepal. Part 3. Forests in the Subsistence Economy of Sindhu Palchok and Kabhre Palanchok. Mountain Research and Development 7: 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maraseni, T. N., Neupane, P. R., Lopez-Casero, F., and Cadman, T. (2014). An assessment of the impacts of the REDD+ pilot project on community forests user groups (CFUGs) and their community forests in Nepal. Journal of Environmental Management 136: 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, C. L. (2014). REDDuced: From sustainability to legality to units of carbon—The search for common interests in international forest governance. Environmental Science & Policy 35: 12–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MEA. (2005). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press. Washington, D.C.

  • Melo, I. (2014). Integrating multiple benefits in market-based climate mitigation schemes: The case of the Climate, Community and Biodiversity certification scheme. Environmental Science & Policy: 49–56.

  • Nightingale, A. (2003). Nature–society and development: social, cultural and ecological change in Nepal. Geoforum 34: 525–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niraula, R. R., Gilani, H., Pokharel, B. K., and Qamer, F. M. (2013). Measuring impacts of community forestry program through repeat photography and satellite remote sensing in the Dolakha district of Nepal. Journal of Environmental Management 126: 20–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ojha, H. R., Khatri, D., Shrestha, K. K., Bushley, B., and Sharma, N. (2013). Carbon, community and governance: is Nepal getting ready for REDD+? Forests, Trees and Livelihoods 22: 216–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oslo REDD Exchange (2013) Conference Report. The University of Life Sciences. Oslo.

  • Pandey, S. S., Cockfield, G., and Maraseni, T. N. (2014). Dynamics of carbon and biodiversity under REDD+ regime: A case from Nepal. Environmental Science & Policy 38: 272–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petley, D. N., Hearn, G. J., Hart, A., Rosser, N. J., Stuart, A., Dunning, S. A., Oven, K., and Mitchell, W. A. (2007). Trends in landslide occurrence in Nepal. Natural Hazards 43: 23–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pistorius, T. (2012). From RED to REDD+: the evolution of a forest-based mitigation approach for developing countries. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 4: 638–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pokharel, B. K., and Nurse, M. (2004). Forests and people's livelihood: benefiting the poor from community forestry. Journal of Forest and Livelihood 4: 19–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pokorny, B., Scholz, I., and de Jong, W. (2013). REDD+ for the poor or the poor for REDD+? About the limitations of environmental policies in the Amazon and the potential of achieving environmental goals through pro-poor policies. Ecology and Society 18: 3. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05458-180203.

  • Poudel, M., Thwaites, R., Race, D., and Ram Dahal, G. (2014). REDD+ and community forestry: implications for local communities and forest management - a case study from Nepal. International Forestry Review 16: 39–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saito-Jensen, M., Rutt, R. L., and Khanal Chhetri, B. B. (2013). Social and Environmental Tensions: Affirmative Measures Under REDD+Carbon Payment Initiatives in Nepal. Human Ecology 42: 683–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, J. e. a. (2013). Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. PNAS 110: 8349–8356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherr, S., and McNeely, J. (2007). Farming with nature: the science and practice of ecoagriculture. Island Press, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherr, S. J., and McNeely, J. A. (2008). Biodiversity conservation and agricultural sustainability: towards a new paradigm of ‘ecoagriculture’ landscapes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 363:477–494. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2165.

  • Shrestha, S., S, K. B., and Karki, S. (2014). Case Study Report: REDD+ Pilot Project in Community Forests in Three Watersheds of Nepal. Forests 5: 2425–2439.

  • Skutsch, M. (2012). Community Forest Monitoring for the Carbon Market: Opportunities under REDD. Routledge.

  • Swift, M. J., Izac, A.-M. N., and van Noordwijk, M. (2004). Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes - are we asking the right questions? Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 104: 113–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari, S., and Bhattarai, K. (2011). Migration, Remittances and Forests: Disentangling the Impact of Population and Economic Growth on Forests. Policy Research Working Papers. The World Bank.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden

    Kristina Marquardt, Dil Khatri & Adam Pain

Authors
  1. Kristina Marquardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dil Khatri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adam Pain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristina Marquardt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marquardt, K., Khatri, D. & Pain, A. REDD+, forest transition, agrarian change and ecosystem services in the hills of Nepal. Hum Ecol 44, 229–244 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-016-9817-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-016-9817-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation