PAANI PROGRAM | पानी परियोजना GENDER EQUALITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION ANALYSIS

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by DAI Global LLC. The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Cover photo: Focus group discussion held in November 2018 as part of GESI assessment. Group included Dalit and marginalized community members impacted by environmental damage from unplanned road construction in Thalara Rural Municipality, Bajhang District of West Seti Watershed.

Photo credit: USAID Paani Program/ Govinda Bhandari This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by DAI Global LLC. The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

PAANI PROGRAM | पानी परियोजना GENDER EQUITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION ANALYSIS

PROGRAM TITLE: USAID PAANI PROGRAM DAI PROJECT NUMBER: 1002810 SPONSORING USAID OFFICE: USAID/NEPAL IDIQ NUMBER: AID-OAA-I-14-00014 TASK ORDER NUMBER: AID-367-TO-16-00001 CONTRACTOR: DAI GLOBAL LLC DATE OF PUBLICATION: APRIL 30, 2019 AUTHOR: BARUN GURUNG

CONTENTS

BACKGROUND 4 PURPOSE 4 ACTIVITY & TASK SUMMARY 5 METHODOLOGY 5 1. NUMBER OF PEOPLE INTERVIEWED 5 2. METHODS AND TOOLS 6 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY 6 1. INNOVATION SYSTEMS APPROACH 6 2. PROGRAM INNOVATION STAGES 7 SOCIAL EXCLUSION / INCLUSION 7 1. THE THREE DIMENSIONS OF AN ORGANIZATION 8 2. ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK (SEE ANNEX 2 FOR QUESTIONS) 9 3. QUALITY OF PARTICIPATION AND DECISION MAKING 9 LEADERSHIP PRACTICE AND GESI 10 THE STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT 11 ACCOMPLISHMENTS, OUTPUTS & DELIVERABLES 11 SECTION 1: GENDER EQUALITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IN WATER PLANNING 11 1.1 INTRODUCTION 11 1.2 GESI AND NATIONAL PLANNING 12 1.3 GESI AND WATER RESOURCES 12 1.4 WUMP: AN OPPORTUNITY? 13 SECTION 2. GENDER EQUALITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IN THE PROGRAM GOALS AND STRUCTURE 13 2.1 INTRODUCTION 14 2.2 SETTING THE CONTEXT 14 2.3 CHALLENGES 15 2.4 SUMMARY 17 SECTION 3: CAPACITY NEEDS OF GRANT RECIPEINT ORGANIZATIONS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 18 3.1 INTRODUCTION 18 3.2 CHALLENGES 18 3.3 OPPORTUNITIES 21 3.4 SUMMARY 22 SECTION 4: THE INTERSECTION OF GENDER, CASTE, ETHNICITY AND POVERTY 22 4.1 INTRODUCTION 22 4.2 SETTING THE CONTEXT OF MARGINALIZATION 23 4.3 STATUS OF WOMEN AND DALITS IN THE PAANI PROGRAM AREAS 24 4.4 SUMMARY 31 RECOMMENDATIONS & NEXT STEPS 32 WHAT MANAGEMENT MUST DO 32 WHAT GESI – TEAM MUST DO 33 ANNEXES 34 ANNEX 1: STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN FOR GESI INTEGRATION IN PAANI PROGRAM 35

INTERMEDIATE RESULTS 35 CONTRACT SPECIFIED OUTCOMES 35 GESI-OUTCOMES 35 INDICATORS 35 REQUIRED INPUTS/ACTIONS 35 ANNEX 2: ACTION PLAN 37 ANNEX 3: REFERENCES REVIEWED AND CITED 39 ANNEX 4: CHECKLIST OF KEY ITEMS FOR AN ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS 41 ANNEX 5: TOOLS FROM GENDER ANALYSIS 44 ANNEX 6: FRAMEWORK FOR GESI ANALYSIS OF PAANI PROGRAM 46 ANNEX 7: INTERVIEWS AND MAPPING EXERCISES WITH FOCUS GROUPS 47 ANNEX 8: MAPPING EXERCISES 51 51 57 ANNEX 9: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ATTENDING FOCUS GROUPS 61 ANNEX 10: LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATION CONTACTED 63

BACKGROUND The Nepal Paani Program is a 5 year, $25 million USAID-funded Project in Nepal, awarded on April 11, 2016. Water is the single most important natural resource underpinning Nepal’s economy and livelihoods. The sustainable management of water resources in Nepal depends on addressing climate change and protecting healthy, biodiverse ecosystems. PANI aims to enhance Nepal’s ability to manage water resources for multiple uses and users through climate change adaptation and the conservation of freshwater biodiversity. The focus will be at the watershed, basin, and national scales and the project has approximately $5 million in grants and activity procurements. This goal will be reached by meeting the following objectives:

Reduce threats to freshwater biodiversity in the Karnali, Mahakali, and Rapti river basins.

Increase the ability of targeted human and ecological communities to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change through improved water management.

This will be accomplished through four intermediate results (IRs):

IR 1 – Increased knowledge, engagement, and benefits for local water users

IR 2 – Improved river-basin-level resource management

IR 3 – Increased coordination and strengthened enabling environment

IR 4 – Expanded knowledge base

PURPOSE The overall purpose of the study was to assess the extent to which GESI integration has been considered and actualized in the design and implementation of any Paani program strategic approaches, and if these resulted in equitable access of program benefits to women and marginalized communities such as Dalits, Janajati including Majhi, Bote, Kumal, Rajhi, Badi and Sonaha/Fisher Communities of Mahakali, Rapti and Karnali River Basins.

The more specific purpose of the study was twofold:

To conduct an analysis of the GESI situation within the different watersheds and

Identify the capacity needs of partners and local governments to mainstream GESI in all Paani activities.

The activities indicated in the terms of reference included the following:

(i) Conduct GESI assessment in the Paani program areas. This assessment would include examining the root causes and its impacts of GESI issues identified from Paani’s watershed. (ii) Conduct analysis of critical institutional, legal, regulatory, policy and capacity gaps on GESI integration in the current transition stage to decentralization process E.g. Does the country’s existing legal and regulatory framework include policies and legislation on gender equality and social inclusion on water rights and access to water resources? Are water resource use and

management policies and benefit sharing mechanisms that are in place, GESI sensitive? What are the institutional and cultural barriers that could prevent women and marginalized communities’ access to water resources and equitably sharing benefits from water resources? (iii) Conduct assessment on the training and capacity building needs of rural municipalities, municipalities, local government line agencies and community-based organizations involved or potential to be involved in the Paani programs and in the specific location. (iv) Review and analyze collected data and information to produce the GESI Assessment Report Produce detailed final report on the GESI assessment. Develop and present root causes and its impact of GESI issues and with recommendations and a Plan of Action with measurable indicators for results linked to the 11 strategic approaches.

ACTIVITY & TASK SUMMARY The report contains the findings of the Gender Equality and Social Inclusion study that was conducted in December 2018. Additionally, it lays out a strategy for GESI-integration in the Program’s outcomes and activities, while also outlining some key recommendations and an Action Plan for implementation.

While the overall purpose of the study was to assess the extent of GESI integration in the design, and the impacts of the Paani Program on its various beneficiaries, the specific goals were two-fold:

• To conduct an analysis of the GESI situation with the different watersheds and; • To identify the capacity needs of partners and local governments to mainstream GESI in all Paani activities.

METHODOLOGY The study was led by the consultant and supported by the Paani GESI team. There were two parts to the study:

• The first consisted of a review of Paani annual work plan and the small grant proposals; a review of the GESI framework for Nepal, papers related to the National Strategy for Water Use Management and Planning (WUMP) and Methods’ documents to assess women’s empowerment in Knowledge; Leadership and Income (see www.wplus.org). • The second part of the study consisted of field visits in three river basins: Mahakali, Karnali, and Rapti.

1. NUMBER OF PEOPLE INTERVIEWED During the field visit to the six watersheds, a total of 212 people were interviewed in a combination of focus groups and individual interview sessions. The majority of interviewees were members of User Groups of the Paani Program, elected officials of the Local Governments, and several selected individuals from local communities.

A total of 200 members of varying backgrounds attended the focus groups; five elected officials were from local governments, and seven members of the local communities that were not affiliated to the Paani Program. Below is a table of individuals disaggregated by sex, caste, and ethnicity.

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS:14 Caste/Ethnicity Total Female Male Dalit 63 35 28

Janajati 79 61 18 BCTS1 53 23 30 Newar 5 1 4 Total 200 120 80

2. METHODS AND TOOLS Key questions for the analysis were derived from the 9-box organizational framework and gender analysis frameworks (Annex 8). All discussions that were conducted in focus groups were followed by interview sessions with selected informants. Both the discussions and interviews were guided by ethnographic principles that relied on viewing people in their cultural setting, and valuing close-up, personal experiences of the subjects.

A combination of tools from gender analysis, ethnographic practice and organizational analysis were applied. These included the following:

• 9-box framework analysis to understand the inner workings of local governments and user groups; • Activity Profile to understand the differential labor inputs of women and men in subsistence activities; • Access/Control Profile; to determine who has access to resources within households and who has decision -making power over the use and sale of resources • 24-time clock; to determine the differential work burdens of women and men • Seasonal Calendars; to determine the periods of food insecurity and alternative livelihood strategies employed by people

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY The conceptual framework adopted for the study draws on discrete but inter related concepts that are central to an improved understanding of processes that produce and reproduce social asymmetries based on gender and social exclusion.

1. INNOVATION SYSTEMS APPROACH The study adopts an Innovation Systems Approach, which refers to the several components that make up the processes and systems of service delivery and the way these components are organized and managed within the structure of Paani. The components of an Innovation System determine how the flow of

1 BCTS: Bahun, Chettri, Thakuri, Sanyasi

information and good partnership coalitions are facilitated between key partners (e.g. Paani program, local governments and grantees, and local user groups and communities). Components of an innovation system deal with the linkages between the program goal and structure, the ways that the implementing bodies comply with, implement and report on the program goals, and how service is delivered to user groups and communities.

Policy: GESI and Water Resources Program Goal & Structure Implementing Bodies

Beneficiaries

2. PROGRAM INNOVATION STAGES In particular, the following analysis identifies three stages or components of the Paani Program Innovation System:

i) Program Goals and Structure a. Development Hypothesis b. Contract-specified Outcomes c. Strategic Approaches ii) Implementing Bodies a. Grantees b. Local Governments iii) Beneficiaries a. User Groups b. Larger Community

Each stage or component will be analyzed from a Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) perspective, with the existing challenges, opportunities, and actions to be considered.

SOCIAL EXCLUSION / INCLUSION The concept of social exclusion / inclusion provides an important analytical lens into the present national discourse on gender equality and social inclusion. However, it is important to acknowledge the larger debate regarding the precise definition and relationship between the two concepts.

Social exclusion has been defined as “the process through which individuals or groups are wholly or partially excluded from full participation in the society within which they live” (European foundation, 1195, p.4, quoted in de Haan, 1998, cited in Francis, 20022).

Social inclusion has been less well defined except as a corollary to exclusion. Subsequently, conceptions of inclusion are implicit and largely un-problematized. However, it has been put forth that the concept of social inclusion gained prominence in the policy discourse in Europe since it replaced the concept of poverty, taking into its fold more dimensions of people’s lives than the poverty concept (Aasland and Flotten. 20023).

The uncritical applicability of the criteria for inclusion has been under question by some in Nepal4. Nevertheless, the inclusion / exclusion debate has now pervaded the official development policy discourse in Nepal. Inclusion as an official policy made inroads into government policy after inclusion was incorporated as one of the four pillars of Nepal’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper in 2003, which is also Nepal’s Tenth Plan. As a consequence, inclusion, state restructuring, proportionate representation are recurring themes in the present public discourse in Nepal.

Nepal’s inclusive approach aims to improve the human development and empowerment index of those who have been economically and socially left behind. This includes Dalits, Adhibasi’Jana jatis, Madhesis, Tharus, Muslims, Other Backward Castes, Minorities, the marginalized, persons with disabilities, gender and sexual minorities, farmers, laborers, people of backward regions and poor Khas Aryas5.

1. THE THREE DIMENSIONS OF AN ORGANIZATION In order to better understand exclusion / inclusion processes within the context of an organization, it becomes important to view the organization in terms of its structure and culture. There are three dimensions of an organization: Technical; Socio political; and Cultural. In turn, each dimension has three elements, making nine elements.

The leadership practices, decision-making processes, and capacity or skills for Gender Equality and Social Inclusion methods in local governments and grantee organizations have been analyzed through the lens of the three dimensions and nine elements of the organizational framework presented below:

2 Francis, P. (1997). “Social Capital, Civil Society and Social Exclusion” in Kothari, Uma and Matin Minouge (eds) “Development Theory and Practice: Critical Perspectives”. Hampshire: Palgrav 3 Aasland, A and T. Fløtten (2001). “Ethnicity and Social Exclusion in Estonia and Latvia” in Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 53, No. 7. (Nov., 2001), Pp. 1023-1049. 4 Rawal argues that social exclusion/inclusion is a contested term and given the diversity context of Nepal, the concept needs to more clearly reflect the social, cultural and historical realities more appropriately, rather than a wholesale adoption of the concept for emotive appeal for a “segment of the population” (Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, Vol 2. 2018. pp. 178. 5 A common Framework for GESI: GESI working group. International Development Partners Group. Nepal, 2017

2. ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK (SEE ANNEX 2 FOR QUESTIONS)

ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK

TECHNICAL Mandate/Policy Task & Responsibility Expertise DIMENSION Is there a GESI policy? Is someone responsible for Is there GESI expertise and GESI? capacity? SOCIO POLITICAL Influence Decision Making Room to Innovate DIMENSION Who influences GESI policy? What are the decision- Is there room or space for new making processes? ideas such as GESI? CULTURAL Values and Norms Cooperation Attitude DIMENSION What are the symbols Is there cooperation amongst What are the attitudes of staff on associated with the staff for GESI? GESI? organization? 3. QUALITY OF PARTICIPATION AND DECISION MAKING6

The following framework follows provides different scenarios of decision –making based on the type of participation required between program approaches and community interests, at each stage of the Program cycle.

The quality of participation has been employed in the development of the GESI-related results in the Outcome map that appears in the Strategic Action Plan in Section 5.1.

TYPE OF PARTICIPATION TYPE OF DECISION MAKING

Type A (Contractual) Project planners make the decision alone without organized communication with women and men in the community Type B (Consultative) Project planners make the decision alone but with organized communication with farmers. Projects know about women’s and men’s opinions, preferences and priorities through organized one-way communication with women and men from the community. Project planners may or may not let this information affect their decision. The decision is not made with women and men from the community nor is it delegated to community members. Type C (Collaborative) Planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation are shared a shared decision between community women and men and project staff involving organized communication with each other. Project staff and community women and men know about each other’s opinions, preferences and priorities through organized two-way communication. The decisions are made jointly; project staff/planners on their own nor community members do not make them alone. No party has a right to revoke the shared decision.

6 Adapted from: Types of Research based on Locus of Decision-Making. System-wide Program for Participatory Research and Gender Analysis. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). 2007.

Type D The decision is made by women (and men) collectively in a group process or by community (Women-led) members who are involved in organized communication with project staff and/or other external sources of development funds. Women and men from the community know about the external sources’ opinions, preferences, proposals and priorities through organized two- way communication. Community members (women in particular) may or may not let this information affect their decision. When this type of participatory process is initiated, an external funding source may be facilitating the collective or individual decision-making of women (and men) farmers or may have already built the ability of women (and men) farmers to make the decision without outsider involvement. Women (and men) from the community have a right to revoke the decision. Type E (Women experimentation Women make the decision individually or in a group without organized communication with men from the community or with external sources/agencies.

LEADERSHIP PRACTICE AND GESI

Leadership practices, particularly in the local government structures have been analyzed according to the comparative models below. An examination of the practice of leadership can be compared in terms of two contrasting models: traditional and relational. The traditional model of leadership is deeply hierarchical and leaves little space for other organizational members to participate in any meaningful way, and as a result, is less efficient in achieving organizational goals.

By contrast, relational leadership refers to practice that is inclusive and is a way of achieving goals and getting the job done using skills such as listening, mutuality, reciprocity, and sensitivity to the emotional context. It is founded on a set of implicit beliefs, for example, the idea that growth, achievement, and effectiveness occur best within a network of connection and support.

Another underlying belief is that inter-dependence is something to strive for. It is powerful and productive to be mutually reliant on others.

A third is that important work outcomes include not only what one achieves oneself but also what one enables others to achieve, for example, by facilitating effective relationships between stakeholders, or teaching others, or paying attention to the emotional dynamics in a situation to ensure that a project stays on track.

COMPARING LEADERSHIP MODELS Caste/Ethnicity Total Dalit 63 Janajati 79 BCTS7 53

7 BCTS: Bahun, Chettri, Thakuri, Sanyasi

Newar 5 Total 200

THE STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

SECTION 1: This section discusses the gender equality and social inclusion policy and regulations of the Government of Nepal. Against this backdrop, the analysis focuses on the extent to which Gender Equality and Social Inclusion has been integrated into the policies and regulations of water resource management in Nepal.

SECTION 2: This section contains an analysis of the Program Goals and Structure. Underlying the Program’s goal and structure are three key components:

• The Development Hypothesis that guides the logic of the Program • The Intermediate Results and Sub-results that follow from the logic of the hypothesis and • Strategic Approaches adopted to achieve the outcomes/results

The analysis focuses on the extent to which GESI considerations are explicitly or implicitly evident in each component, and how these in turn, impact the information flows that subsequently that affect grantees and local governments in the innovation system.

SECTION 3: This section focuses on the capacity needs of grantee organizations and local governments for integrating gender equality and social inclusion considerations into their program design and implementation. Additionally, the analysis focuses on some key elements of the organizational framework through a GESI lens: the policy environment; GESI expertise; decision-making; and leadership practices in local government

SECTION 4: This section outlines the challenges for women and members of disadvantaged groups living on the intersections of gender, caste, ethnicity and poverty. In describing the status of women and Dalits in particular, the discussion focuses on how communities in the Paani Program area must balance their immediate livelihood need with participation. Additionally, the discussion on Time Poverty confronting women focuses on the causes: namely, male out-migration, food insecurity, and poverty.

SECTION 5: The last section outlines key recommendations for the Paani Program on ways to integrate GESI in its Strategic Approaches. In addition to the recommendations, the Strategic Action Plan for GESI integration is outlined in a results chain framework, followed by specific steps that need to be undertaken.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS, OUTPUTS & DELIVERABLES

SECTION 1: GENDER EQUALITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IN WATER PLANNING

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The integration of Gender Equality and Social Inclusion has become enshrined in Nepal’s development discourse. The policy environment, while establishing significant milestones to achieving gender equality and social inclusion, has often lagged behind actual experiences that are generated from the project level practices. However, project level experiences provide a rich source of best practices that can be readily adapted and implemented for the Paani Program Grantees and Local Governments, while developing user groups for water resources management.

1.2 GESI AND NATIONAL PLANNING8 The constitution of Nepal is a significant milestone for GESI and enshrines rights for women, the poor, the vulnerable and people from different social groups. Positive provisions include affirmative actions to redress historically embedded disadvantages based on sex, caste/ethnicity and other forms of exclusion.

In the Approach Paper for the 14th Three Year Plan (2016/17 – 2018/19, The Government of Nepal (GoN) aims for economic prosperity with social justice. The Approach Paper recognizes that improving gender equality and addressing issues of “backward” regions, classes and communities, and excluded groups requires conscious efforts, such as targeted programs, equitable distribution of resources, and social security for poverty reduction.

1.3 GESI AND WATER RESOURCES Although the Water Resources Act 1992 and Regulation 1993, Environment Protection Act 1997 and Regulation 1997 are silent on gender issues, some of the sectoral policies, such as those of irrigation, drinking water and sanitation, have explicitly recognized the lack of women’s participation in decision making forums and adopted a quota policy to overcome the barriers to women’s participation in formal decision-making bodies9.

The Irrigation Regulation 1999, which was amended in 2003, mandates a minimum 33 percent participation of women and representation of marginalized communities in local water management committees.

The National Water Supply and Sanitation Policy 2003 and Rural Water Supply and Sanitation National Action Plan 2003 call for 30 percent women’s participation in users’ committee.

The National Sanitation and Hygiene Master Plan 2011 has recognized gender and equity concerns to a greater degree. The WASH Sector Development Plan (2016-2030) includes an Equity and Inclusion Framework. The recent policy documents, such as the National Sanitation and Hygiene Master Plan (NSHMP) 2011, which was prepared through an extensive consultation process involving a wide range of stakeholders at central, district and community levels, is GESI -responsive in its provisions and practices. The Master Plan has expressed its commitment to GESI through GESI responsive objectives:

9 Gender and Social Inclusion in Local Water Planning: Lessons from water use master plan practices in Nepal. ICIMOD Working Paper, 2017/16

i) To help ensure equity, inclusion and sustainability through participatory planning process; and ii) To develop a mechanism for ensuring access of poor, disadvantaged, and other socially excluded groups to toilets and other hygiene behavior. It acknowledges GESI as integral to achieving universal Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) coverage. This is corroborated by one of its statements:

Ultra-poor and disadvantaged groups need special consideration for their access to hygiene and sanitation promotion. Provision of financial support is crucial, especially to ensure the access of socially disadvantaged communities to sanitation facilities10.

1.4 WUMP: AN OPPORTUNITY? The Water Use Master Plan (WUMP) is an approach that has been successfully applied and implemented in several areas of Nepal11. The WUMP is an integrated approach to the management of water resources and uses at the village level.

The WUMP guidelines ensure the GESI issues are addressed at the community level, promoting participation of women and excluded groups in water resources assessment, needs identification and program prioritization. More specifically, WUMP provides a set of best practices that can be readily adapted and implemented for Paani Program Grantees and Local Governments, while developing user groups for water resources management.

Basic Principles of Water Use Master Plan (WUMP)12

• A process that creates a common platform (gender balanced and inclusive) for local water planning • A visioning tool that helps local bodies for annual as well as periodic planning and project prioritization • A tool that specifies the total water budget in a VDC and indicates its potential uses • A tool that helps evaluating competitive demand, manages water conflicts and confirms equity • A tool for proactive planning for both immediate disaster risk reduction and for longer term climate change adaptation

SECTION 2. GENDER EQUALITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IN THE PROGRAM GOALS AND STRUCTURE

10 The National Sanitation and Hygiene Master Plan 2011. 11 Water Use Master Plan Preparation Guidelines. Lalitpur, Nepal. WARM-P/HELVETAS; Rural Village Water Resource Management Project (2011). HELVETAS and ICIMOD. 12 Gender and Social Inclusion in Local Water Planning: Lessons from Water Use Master Plan Practices in Nepal. ICIMOD, 2017/16

2.1 INTRODUCTION This section contains an analysis of the Program Goals and Structure. Underlying the Program’s goal and structure are three key components:

• The Development Hypothesis that guides the logic of the Program • The Intermediate Results and Sub-results that follow from the logic of the hypothesis and • Strategic Approaches adopted to achieve the outcomes/results The analysis focuses on the extent to which GESI considerations are explicitly or implicitly evident in each component, and how these in turn, impact the information flows that subsequently that affect grantees and local governments in the innovation system.

2.2 SETTING THE CONTEXT

2.2.1 THE DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS The Program’s development hypothesis proposes that the fulfillment of four conditions will lead to three results or outcomes:

PAANI PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS

IF there is • Improved scientific information to inform decision making • Better capacity to manage freshwater resources • Effective governance • Local solutions that enhance resilient livelihoods and promote freshwater conservation • A stronger policy and institutional enabling environment to coordinate the multiple uses of water

THEN the government • Conserve freshwater biodiversity and people of Nepal will: • Adapt to climate change; and • Maintain the natural resource base needed for sustainable economic growth

2.2.2 INTERMEDIATE RESULTS AND SUB-RESULTS

The results that flow from this hypothesis are contained in the contract-specified Outcomes of the Program. There are Four Orders of Key Outcomes that are specified with additional outcomes for each Order:

First Order: Integrated enabling structures developed and institutional arrangement formalized

Second Order: Changes in relationships, capacities and behaviors

Third Order: Emerging social, economic and water resource and biodiversity benefits

Fourth Order: Freshwater ecological processes and values conserved

2.2.3 STRATEGIC APPROACHES

There are eleven Strategic Approaches through which the results will be obtained:

• Improve local management for capture fisheries • Improve local capacity for water management • Improve local capacities for regulation and management of roads and mining • Improve local capacity for managing invasive • Improve local capacity for disaster risk reduction • Improve basin level resource management • Support sustainable hydropower • Support CSOs to advocate for transparent and accountable hydropower decision making • Strengthen Policy and Planning for IWRM • Fill knowledge gaps • Integrate into academic spaces

2.3 CHALLENGES 2.3.1 KEY CHALLENGE 1: NEED FOR A MORE EXPLICIT ARTICULATION OF GESI-SENSITIVE PARTICIPATION The effective participation by communities is the lynchpin to sustainable management of freshwater biodiversity regimes, and meaningful participation must ensure access to livelihood options. Additionally, processes for effective participation require an acknowledgement of, and measures to, mitigate the embedded asymmetries based on gender and social positioning.

Participation, especially by those who are most dependent on freshwater biodiversity resources such as women and members of socially excluded groups, is not sufficiently elaborated in the formulation of the Program’s Development Hypothesis, Intermediate Results, and Strategic Approaches. This results in ‘process compliance’ for GESI results reporting by implementing partner organizations (grant recipients) rather than reporting on outcomes.

What follows is an assessment of the Program’s Development Hypothesis, and Intermediate Results from a GESI perspective. It begins by outlining the challenges, and identifies opportunities for GESI- integration.

Development Hypothesis The preconditions of increased capacity to manage freshwater biodiversity, generate effective governance, and enhance local livelihood solutions are based on the premise of meaningful participation for decision-making by local communities. There are two key implicit assumptions in this formulation: i) that people’s engagement through active participation will occur in isolation of power asymmetries based on gender and social positioning; and ii) that communities will engage in long term conservation, effective governance and climate adaptation goals in spite of their more immediate and urgent livelihood needs.

The formulation needs to more explicitly outline the challenges of gender and social asymmetries that inhibit the quality of participation, and how a poverty predicament eclipses participation to achieve long- term program goals. These challenges, and pathways to mitigate them, need to be more clearly and explicitly articulated in the Development Hypothesis.

Intermediate Results/Outcomes The Intermediate Results or Contract-specified Outcomes and their accompanying sub-outcomes do not demonstrate sufficient GESI-related results that are intrinsic to:

• Changes in relationships, capacities and behaviors (Second Order), or • The role of local communities in generating enabling structures and institutional arrangements (First Order), • Disaggregated beneficiaries of the biodiversity benefits (Third Order); and • The role of local communities in dialogues at the local, provincial, and national levels for conservation policies and regulations. 2.3.2 KEY CHALLENGE 2: GESI PROCESS COMPLIANCE OVER OUTCOME COMPLIANCE Strategic Approaches A GESI – blind development hypothesis, and the absence of GESI-specific Intermediate Results almost pre-determines GESI results as process (outputs) rather than outcomes.

Small Grantees are the main mechanism through which Strategic Approaches are implemented. A review of 17 small grant proposals from a GESI perspective reveals the following:

• GESI considerations appear as outputs or activities that include the participation of women and members of Disadvantaged Groups in trainings or group activities; • There are no results linked to increased capacity, behavioral changes, and/or changes in relationships that may occur as a result of participation of women and members of Disadvantaged Groups; • The Program monitoring and evaluation mechanism emphasizes output-based / process reporting, with the consequence that grantees do not have a way of reporting higher level results (outcomes) except to report these anecdotally, lacking any degree of methodological rigor. Key Opportunities Key Opportunity 1: Moving towards GESI-based outcomes

The elaboration of the Intermediate Results of the Program to include a GESI-perspective is based on three distinct types of results that can be obtained. These are:

i) Women and Disadvantaged Groups (DAGs) have increased income opportunities from their participation in Program activities; ii) Women and DAGs have increased and enhanced knowledge of their rights, demonstrate abilities to make local level plans, and affect behavioral and institutional changes; iii) Women and DAGs demonstrate increased capacity to participate in decisions that affect their livelihoods, engage with the Program activities, and impact local, and eventually, provincial and national policy dialogues.

CONTRACT-SPECIFIED GESI GESI-SENSITIVE OUTCOMES INTERMEDIATE RESULTS (PAANI) OUTCOMES (PAANI)13 (RECOMMENDED)

13 These specific contract-specified outcomes are specified here due to their potential for further elaboration to turn them into GESI outcomes.

First Order: Commitments to plans & resources Long Term outcomes (funding & in kind support Integrated enabling structures developed and • Local user groups actively collaborate in the design and implementation of institutional arrangements formalized plans with local governments • User groups are able to draw down resources from local governments and other external resources Short term outcome

• % of action plans resulting from GESI-integrated planning workshops developed by user groups are funded

Second Order: • Increased capacity of user groups, Long Term outcomes especially women and marginalized groups, to sustainably use • Increased decision -making roles of Change in relationships, capacities, and behaviors freshwater biodiversity resources women and DAGs in water • Improved capacity of local management decisions. communities to develop climate smart green infrastructure Intermediate outcomes • Increased understanding of GESI issues and water resources • Increased incomes contributing to food management security • Increased dialogue and inclusion in • Conversion of income into assets water management decisions Short term outcomes (including women and DAGs) • Increased knowledge • Behavioral and Institutional changes • Increased income generating opportunities available Third Order: • Hydropower operators adopt Long term outcomes mitigation measures that reduce threats to freshwater biodiversity, • Increased voice of local communities Emerging social, economic and water resources & adapt to climate change & in hydropower development decisions increase benefits to biodiversity benefits that impact them communities • Increased access by women, DAGs and local communities to incomes, employment and other benefits Fourth Order: • Human wellbeing improved Long term outcome • Water uses balanced and sustainably managed across Freshwater ecological processes and values conserved • Emergence: Movement from ‘private’ diverse interests to ‘public’ spaces • Economic options diversified

2.4 SUMMARY Using an Innovation Systems Approach, the analysis focuses on the extent to which GESI considerations are integrated into the Development Hypothesis; Intermediate Results and the Strategic Approaches of the Paani Program. In turn, it explores how the formulation of these components impacts the practice of GESI by grantees, and local governments.

The analysis identifies two key challenges: 1) need for a more explicit articulation of GESI-sensitive participation in the Development Hypothesis and 2) GESI process compliance over outcome compliance at the level of implementation.

The opportunity for moving ahead is identified through the identification of GESI – based outcomes that can be integrated into the existing Intermediate Results of the Program.

SECTION 3: CAPACITY NEEDS OF GRANT RECIPEINT ORGANIZATIONS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

3.1 INTRODUCTION The following assessment is based on interviews with five grant-recipient organizations, a review of 17 grant proposals, and five members of local governments during the field visit.

Interviews with the grant–recipient organizations were to establish their capacity needs for integrating GESI considerations into their activities and outcomes. The assessment of the proposals was to determine the level of GESI integration in their proposed activities and goals.

Interviews were conducted with selected individuals from the elected local governments. The aim of these interviews was to establish their capacity needs for GESI integration into their program plans, and also to determine their leadership practices.

There is limited capacity in grantee organizations and local governments for planning, combined with ways to integrate GESI consideration into design processes, which includes GESI problem analysis, and developing goals and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms from a GESI perspective.

Additionally, leadership in local government planning is largely ‘top-down’, hierarchical, and non- transparent. Women and members of socially excluded groups tend to be largely excluded from any meaningful participation in such forums.

3.2 CHALLENGES 3.2.1 KEY CHALLENGE 1 Though there is great interest in developing capacity to integrate GESI considerations in their planning, members of grant-receiving organizations outlined the following challenges:

• Bridging conservation goals with livelihood needs: In general, discussions with field staff from grant-recipient organizations acknowledged the difficulty of bridging the immediate livelihood needs of the community with the Program’s longer term goals of sustainable management of freshwater biodiversity, local governance and climate change adaptation. The expectations of community members for livelihood options were great. • Field staffs are largely unaware of the larger objectives/goals of the Paani Program: One of the findings is that community members of user groups were largely unaware of their roles and responsibilities in relation to the Program. In many cases, field staff of the grant-recipient organizations requested the development of a common ‘learning platform’ where all grant grant-

receiving organizations could share learning and better understand their specific roles in relation to the larger goals of the Program. • Limits of Output- based reporting: In some cases, members of the grant-recipient organizations felt constrained by the limitations of the reporting mechanism of the Program. They recited anecdotal evidence of higher -level outcomes that could be measured more rigorously if they had methodological guidance. • Limited capacity for GESI: Both in the way that GESI considerations are framed in the proposals, and through discussions with field staff of the various organizations, it is evident that there is limited capacity to integrate GESI in their planning processes. GESI is largely viewed as compliance with representation quotas, missing a focus on the social outcomes such as changes in behavior and social relationships, increase in knowledge and income opportunities, and how these contribute to Paani Program’s ultimate goals.

3.2.2 KEY CHALLENGE 2: INSTITUTIONAL GESI BLINDNESS IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Interviews were conducted with senior elected officials of three local governments:

• Jai Prithivi Municipality, Bajhang, West Seti Watershed • Jotha Rural Municipality, Bajhang, West Seti Watershed • Alital Rural Municipality, Rangun Watershed

The assessment focused on the following elements of the organizational framework introduced earlier in the report.

Policy and Influence: There was general acknowledgement that GESI considerations were followed explicitly in the make –up of the elected officials in their respective governments. However, there was no explicit GESI policy nor strategic actions in place for moving beyond compliance through participation.

Three women elected in positions as deputy mayors pointed out how difficult it was for them to “voice” their views, which were largely ignored.

Role/Responsibility: there were no specific roles identified for GESI issues in local governments.

Expertise: all the elected officials expressed the lack of capacity to implement GESI in their program planning. The all evinced keen interest in developing capacity for GESI-integrated planning, and were interested in exploring capacity interventions from Paani Program.

3.2.3 KEY CHALLENGE 3: THE PRACTICE OF LEADERSHIP & THE POLITICS OF EXCLUSION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Capacity interventions largely tend to overlook the fundamental role of organizational leadership practice and the need for developing effective and non-traditional forms of leadership.

Though the new administrative architecture of Nepal is a positive context for new forms of leadership, the general pattern of leadership in local governments can best be described as ‘traditional’, infused with ‘authoritative’ behavior towards subordinates. Underlying this type of leadership practice is a strong ‘upward accountability’ to political party affiliations rather than towards meeting the needs/demands of their local constituencies.

Women and members of socially excluded groups are more than likely to be excluded from decision- making. In interviews conducted with women deputy mayors, women talked about the “lack of transparency and accountability” by their superior (mayor) who are generally male. This was especially pronounced for Dalit women who are deputy mayors. In the words of one:

“No matter how many times I put my agenda on the table, it is always ignored by the mayor”

“……issues that concern Dalits are never considered high priority to be included in the municipality planning process”

The woman head of the Women and Child Services Department, located in the local municipality, complained of not receiving a budget, and also not being invited to contribute through their capacity to integrate GESI considerations in the development of local plans.

The impacts of non-transparent and unilateral decision-making by local governments have real–life consequences for communities, particularly for local constituents like Dalits and other economically vulnerable groups that have no voice in local infrastructure development.

Impact of unilateral decision-making

A meeting with a local road user group in Bajang district demonstrates the consequence of poor, non-transparent decision-making. The community, comprised largely of Badi Dalits and a few Brahmin households, is precariously sandwiched between the ravages of a rising river on the one side, and landslides from a poorly constructed road above their village, leading to another community.

Over the period of the last two years, much of their productive land has been “eaten away” by the river. Landless, the majority of the households resort to earning daily wages in exchange for their labor in the neighboring town to earn incomes for their subsistence.

Compounding their already precarious situation, they now have to contend with the real threat of landslides on the northern side of their village.

The Brahmin households moved to neighboring areas where they have family.

The Badi households have no such options.

An excerpt of an article by Bajang-based journalist Basant Pratap Singh appeared in the national daily, Kantipur, under the header: Padlocked and Gone to India14:

The lack of job opportunities, the damages received to both land and accommodation owing to the pre-dominance of road development has led to the increase in large numbers of people migrating to India with their families in search of work is what the team leader of the said team, Kalak Khatri, says. He said there are some families whose members are seriously ill and since they are unable to get them treated in Nepal they lock up their homes and move to India with the whole family where they work as laborer while treating the sick members. In this way, it results in women being in vulnerable positions, development work comes to a standstill, children are excluded from the schooling they deserve are forced into labor too.

3.3 OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITY 1: POTENTIAL FOR INCREASING INCOME AND KNOWLEDGE FOR WOMEN AND DISADVANTAGED GROUPS (DAGS)

A review of the grant proposals and lessons generated from discussions with seven grantee organizations during the field assessment demonstrate the following lessons:

• The overwhelming majority of grantees recognize that community groups that have been formed to meet the Program goals can only be sustained if there is a livelihoods component. • In many cases, particularly where grantee organizations are locally based, there is evidence of higher degree social outcomes that can, in part, be attributed to Program inputs. However, the existing reporting system adopted by the Program does not allow them to report on these results. • There is also a high demand from grantee organizations to increase their own and community groups’ capacity for gender analysis and social inclusion methods, which include GESI-integrated planning within the technical mandates of their grant conditions. Grantee organizations that potentially contribute to increase Knowledge and increased Income opportunities with their existing activities are listed in the table below:

Grantee Organizations: Potential for two key GESI-related Outcomes

Increased skills and knowledge opportunities

• SAMUDYAYIK SARATHI: Trainings on capture fisheries, freshwater and climate change • Balchaur Forest and Environment Resource Development Center (BAFER): Trainings on aquaculture biodiversity and watershed management; Development of guidelines on community level capture fisheries • Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (NEFEJ): Development of national level policy guidelines • Human Welfare and Environment Protection Center (HWEPC): Identification and distribution of knowledge products for the application of sustainable capture fisheries • Federation of Community Forestry Users Nepal (FECOFUN): Training on low-cost bio engineering practices • ECO AGRO DRM (Pvt. Ltd.): Training and knowledge products to enhance knowledge of root causes of disaster and climate change, and adaptation skills. • Center of Research for Environment Energy and Water (CREW): Training for business planning and marketing strategies

14 Undated manuscript received from the author

• Resources Himalaya Foundation (RHF): Practical knowledge of how to conduct fish surveys, monitor fish stocks and maintain data on capture fisheries • People’s Help Group: Training on climate-smart agriculture, bio pesticide development, drip irrigation, and vermin- compost making • Karnali Integrated Rural Development and Research Center (KIRDARC): Activities and training on developing stakeholder platforms and local action plans for climate change adaptation • Nepal River Conservation Trust (NRCT): Increased people’s participation in dialogue platforms, and advocacy capacity for science-based river conservation • Nepal National Social Welfare Association (NNSWA): Development and dissemination of guidelines for sustainable capture fisheries, exposure to best practices for watershed management and skills for local governments to integrate watershed priority issues in planning. Income Opportunities

• Mallarani Rural Development Concern Center (MRDCC): Provision of support for green enterprise development, and development of value chain for fish marketing • Center for Environmental Energy and Water (CREW): Training and skills for cash crop production for crops such as ginger, turmeric, and groundnuts.

OPPORTUNITY 2: SUPPORTING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WITH GESI STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT

Local governments and their leaders are clearly cognizant of the Government’s commitment to gender equality and social inclusion, and how these considerations must be reflected in all programming decisions and practices. As a result, Jai Prithivi Municipality, Bajhang, West Seti Watershed, Jotha Rural Municipality, Bajhang, West Seti Watershed, Alital Rural Municipality, Rangun Watershed are in the process of developing their own GESI strategies, and have requested capacity support from the Program.

3.4 SUMMARY Grantee organizations and local governments have limited capacity for GESI-integrated planning. A review of the grant proposals demonstrates GESI-considerations are limited to participation of women and DAGs, with little or no effort to demonstrate higher- level GESI-based results. This results from a combination of limited capacity for GESI among grantees, and the ‘output-based’ reporting mechanism demanded by the Paani Program.

Additionally, leadership practices in local governments are largely ‘top-down’, hierarchical and non- transparent. This results in the lack of representation of the needs of women and members of socially excluded groups in the planning process.

The work of grantee organizations has sufficient potential to generate GESI-based outcomes in two specific areas: increased knowledge from trainings and capacity events that could result in behavioral and institutional changes; and increased incomes that could meet livelihoods needs of local groups through participation in Paani Program activities.

SECTION 4: THE INTERSECTION OF GENDER, CASTE, ETHNICITY AND POVERTY

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Revisiting the hypothesis that people’s participation acts as a foundation to achieving the Program goal of sustainable freshwater biodiversity management, this section examines in more detail how gender inequality and social exclusion affect the challenges to more effective participation. Poverty that manifests through long periods of food insecurity, limited land holdings, and equally limited local opportunities for income generation are dis-enabling environments for people’s participation in development in general. Moreover, poverty often intersects with social asymmetries based on gender inequality and social exclusion, posing an even more formidable barrier for women and members of disadvantaged groups to participate meaningfully in development interventions. Specifically, challenges are examined in the context of the ‘status of women’ and through the weight of ‘caste ideology’. This is followed by discussion of an outline of a roadmap of participation that is a useful way of looking at various types of participation in relation to decision -making.

4.2 SETTING THE CONTEXT OF MARGINALIZATION STATUS OF WOMEN & DALITS IN NEPAL While there has been tremendous progress for gender equality and women’s emancipation in Nepal’s policy environment, there are yet structural obstacles to achieving gender equality and women’s empowerment. Article 43 of the Constitution of Nepal (2015) ensures women the rights to lineage, right to safe maternity and reproduction right against all forms of exploitation, and equal rights in family matters and property. The Government of Nepal also attempts to incorporate gender equality into all development policies and programs, including the development of a gender-responsive budget system. However, despite the enabling policy environment, there are yet numerous structural challenges for achieving gender equality. According to the Nepal Living Standards Survey (2010/11), there is a discrepancy between male and female literacy rates: 71.6% and 44.5% respectively. Women in Nepal have lower access to education, health services, social security and freedom, as well as decision -making15 In the case of Dalits, the post-1990 period of multiparty democracy in Nepal granted the recognition of 26 Dalit groups through the formation of the Dalit Commission. However, Dalits represent perhaps, the poorest community in Nepal by all poverty measures: income, consumption and human development. Forty two percent of Dalits live below the poverty line, which is 17 percent higher than that of the national average (25.2%). Madhesi Dalits have the lowest level of consumption with a per capita of NRs. 23,106, followed by Hill Dalit of NRs 25,298 per annum. This is largely due to the fact that a large proportion of Dalits depend on elementary occupations for their livelihoods16.

15 National Women’s Commission Report: http://www2.unwomen.org/-/media/field office esasia/docs/publications/2014/7/socio economic status of women in Nepal. 16 Human Rights Situation of Dalit Community of Nepal (2015). Submission to the UN Universal Periodic Review of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal for 2nd Cycle 23rd Session of the UPR Human Rights Council. 2-13

In terms of participation and representation in governance structures, there is only seven percent representation in the Constituent Assembly17 The status of Dalit women is further compounded virtue of their status as females in a patriarchal society. The literacy rate for women is 45.4% as compared to 52.7% for Dalit men. Women in the Musahar and Dom communities are at the bottom with 17.4% and 17.9% literacy rates.

4.3 STATUS OF WOMEN AND DALITS IN THE PAANI PROGRAM AREAS

The status of women and Dalits fundamentally determines their ability to participate. Many women are time-poor; suffer from heavy work burdens and limited mobility. Periods of food insecurity, while affecting most households, are compounded for women and Dalits because of their limited access to opportunities for services, benefits, income and land holdings.

Field Notes from Mugu District18

Results of a focus group discussion conducted in Mugu District to identify the status of women shows the following results:

• There is still a high level of caste-based discrimination. • Women in particular suffer the consequences of social stigma during menstruation cycles • There is also a high incidence of uterus prolapse among women, a condition that remains largely hidden due to the ‘shame’ associated with it • Women spend a considerable amount of time collecting water for household consumption. This is compounded during the dry season • Women’s representation in community groups is below the nationally mandated 33%. Their limited participation in community groups was attributed to several factors: time limitations, responsibility of the household ‘care economy’, limited mobility due to social norms and values that confine women to the home, and ‘limited skills and capacity’ to participate more effectively. • Women are afforded the opportunity to participate in district level workshops, and training opportunities only when male members of the household are not available. • Women are largely unaware of the budget allocations specifically targeted for women’s development. It was not unusual for such budgets to be reallocated for infrastructure development such as roads and irrigation schemes.

November 2015. Dalit Civil Society Organizations’ Coalition for UPR, Nepal and International Dalit Solidarity Network (IDSN) 17 For a more detailed account of Dalit Status in Nepal, refer to the Situation Analysis of Dalits in Nepal. National Dalit Strategy Report prepared for the National Planning Commission, May 2002. 18 Source: Field notes from Sangita Adhikari, GESI Officer Paani Program. In interviews for this study, a similar opinion concerning the lack of meaningful participation of women in decision making within groups was voiced by the Chairperson of Karnali Ekikrit Mahila Bikash Sangh, Gumgadhi, Mugu, Rara. She recommends economic empowerment opportunities, education and information access on the roles and rights of women in such groups.

• While all community groups are mandated to comply with women’s representation in governance positions, their voices are rarely heard in the decision -making processes of local governments.

Disaggregated representation of workshop participants

Group No Male Female Dalit 4 3 1 Janajati 2 1 1 BCTS 36 31 5 TOTAL 42 35 7

4.3.1 WOMEN AND SOCIAL TABOOS Although criminalized in 2017, and banned the traditional practice of exiling menstruating girls and women from the family home, it nevertheless remains widespread in some areas of western Nepal.

Field Notes

Visiting the home of an Early Child Development teacher19 in Murma 9, Mugu District, Rara, we met with her and the family consisting of the father in law, mother in law, and her two small children. After initial discussions on livelihood and migration practices, we enquired if the practice of goth or chaupadi was still prevalent in the village.

The woman quietly intoned how she lost two infants, aged 15 days and 9 months respectively, to the practice of goth as she pointed to the livestock shed where she had been exiled during both her pregnancies. When asked, she cited high fever and possibly pneumonia as causes for the early death of her infant children.

In response, her mother-in-law quickly responded by attributing the infant deaths to the work of deities

4.3.2 TRIPLE FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION Women, from Dalit communities in particular, reside at the intersections of gender, caste, and poverty situations that produce enduring forms of exclusion from participation in development agendas.

A provincial Member of Parliament in Dailekh discussed triple forms of discrimination: as a woman; as a member of the Dalit social group; and as a woman in the Dalit community20.

19 Name of the individual withheld for privacy concerns 20 See an interview in the Nepali Times with Parbati Bisunke, 26 May 2017. http://archive.nepalitimes.com/article/nation/double-affirmation-dalit-women-elected-to-local-bodies-Nepal,3743

Field Notes

Recounting her childhood experiences with discrimination, both from ‘caste Hindus’ as well as men in her own society, she struggled to get an education. Encouraged by her mother, who through her own illiteracy, foresaw education as a pathway to success.

She is encouraged by the on-going social and political changes brought on through legislation and policy for affirmative action by the Government, but cautions against the more subtle forms of discrimination that many members of the Dalit community now confront. Exclusion tends to be less obvious, more “underground” as in when, her election to the Ward membership in 2016 did not elicit the smearing of vermilion powder by her elected (caste Hindu) colleagues. She also recognizes the more subtle behaviors that prevent her as a guest from entering the kitchen in the home of a caste Hindu family. They take extra pains in asking her to sit, rather than accompany them to the kitchen, a routine that is considered normal etiquette for a woman guest to offer, even as a guest.

She acknowledges the difficulty of naming such behaviors as in fact ‘discriminatory’ in more subtle form, but is simultaneously aware of the burden of caste history and that such interpretations of social behavior become almost inevitable.

Institutionally, she points out that the new administrative architecture that supports the “one basket policy” of funding for local governments, rather than targeted budgeting for members of disadvantaged groups makes it that much more difficult for members of excluded groups to access funds for their development needs.

4.3.3 BALANCING LIVELIHOOD NEEDS WITH PARTICIPATION

A key consideration for members of local user groups was balancing their immediate livelihood needs with their ability to engage in-group activities designed for the Paani Program that they considered important, but were for the longer-term welfare.

In a training event organized for the Natural Resource Management Group in Alital Rural Municipality, Dadheldhura District, Rangun Watershed, 19 members of the group were assembled for the event. Comprised of fourteen women members and four males, their interest in attending the event was unquestionable, though a discussion with participants revealed two important lessons that have critical implications for the sustainability of the group beyond the project duration.

In a sorting activity, women were asked to rank in order of immediate importance, the activities related to production. As shown in table below, activities related to natural resource management ranked low in terms of priority, given largely to their more immediate subsistence needs.

Sorting exercise to determine priorities

Alital, Dadheldhura

ACTIVITIES RANKING

Agriculture 1st

Livestock 2nd

Labor work/ India Migration 3rd

Seasonal Vegetables 4th

Business 5th

Natural Resource Management (Forestation, water source conservation) 6th

Community work (Temple, school, road construction) 7th

Job 8th

The same sorting exercise conducted with the Sonaha community in Bardiya, Lower Karnali Watershed revealed similar results.

Bardiya

ACTIVITIES RANKING

Fishing 1st.

Collecting gold 2nd.

Day labor 3rd.

Rhoda collection 4th.

Agriculture 5th.

Firewood collection 6th.

Community work (roads, plantation, sanitation, mitigation work) 7th.

On average, women in the Paani Program area work roughly fifteen or sixteen hours a day. Waking up at 5 AM, they prepare meals for the family and prepare children for school. In addition to the ‘care work’, women are also engaged in productive activities with the men of the household, as seen in the table below:

#1: Slice of Life in a Woman’s Day

TIME ACTIVTIES

5.00-5.30 Wake up

5.30-7.00 Cleaning house, cleaning utensils, cleaning patio 7.00-8.00 Cooking, Caring children, weeding

8.00-10.00 Ready to kids for school, Pick up to kids at school, Having lunch, Cleaning kitchen 10.00-5.00 - Fishing - Gold Collection - Labor work - Feeding to livestock in the jungle, collection graze and wood - Attend community meeting, training - Most of time they spend in the river - Community work 5.00-6.00 Back to home from river and jungle, Washing utensils, weeding and watering the vegetable farm 6.00-7.00 Preparing dinner

7.00-8.00 - Serving dinner to family and kids, cleaning kitchen, washing utensils, tidy the bed, teaching to kids 8.00-9.00 Watching TV, playing mobile

#2: Slice of life in a Woman’s Day

Daily Activity Clock: Water Resource Conservation Group at Bardiya, Rajipur

TIME ACTIVITIES

5.00-5.30 Wake up

5.30-7.00 Cleaning house, cleaning utensils, cleaning patio 7.00-8.00 Cooking, Caring for children, weeding

8.00-10.00 Ready children for school, Pick up to children at school, Have lunch, Clean kitchen 10.00-5.00 - Fishing - Gold Collection - Labor /work - Grazing livestock in the jungle, collecting grass and firewood

- Attend community meeting, training (at times) - Most of time they spend in the river - Community work (on occasions) 5.00-6.00 Back to home from river and jungle, washing utensils, weeding and watering the vegetable farm

6.00-7.00 Preparing dinner

7.00-8.00 Serving dinner to family and kids, cleaning kitchen, washing utensils, tidy the bed, helping children with homework 8.00-9.00 Watching TV, Mobile phones

9.00 Go to sleep

4.3.4 MALE OUT-MIGRATION In many cases within the project area, women have become de facto heads of households as most of the men have migrated to neighboring India or in some cases, further abroad to the Middle East or Malaysia in search of employment. As a result, women are often alone at home, managing all household activities that include ‘care work’ as well as productive activities such as maintaining home gardens, fishing (in some cases), and managing the labor for farming activities in cases where they have land holdings. Pursuram Municipality in the Rangun Watershed represents a microcosm of challenges to women left alone to care for households as men migrate to India for work. Men from approximately 60%-70% of households in the Municipality migrate to India for periods of six months in a year.

Women talked about their ‘lowered status’ as a result of being alone for long periods of time. Without father figures in the home, children become especially difficult to handle. Moreover, the limited mobility of women, imposed by cultural attitudes and norms that discourage women travelling alone outside the home prove especially difficult.

4.3.5 FOOD INSECURITY

The majority households in the three River Basins are food insecure. On an average, food supplies generated from land holdings last four to five months a year. Community members resort to a number of coping strategies to supplement their food supply. Out-migration, daily wage labor, and borrowing food items from neighbors or shop owners are common coping strategies adopted.

Within the confines of the household, women in particular outlined their individual coping strategies that include cooking practices that include “watering down” food, eating last, sourcing forest foods, or visiting their natal homes.

This is compounded by the ‘burden of shame’ associated with household food insecurity. Many women do not discuss their particular plight in public or with neighbors, instead choosing to remain silent.

A seasonal calendar conducted in Alital Rural Municipality in Dadheldhura represents a somewhat typical example of food insecurity in the Paani Program sites.

SEASONAL CALENDAR DEPICTING PERIOD OF FOOD INSECURITY: ALITAL RURAL MUNICIPALITY

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Mustard Firewood & Wheat Corn Ploughing Paddy Paddy harvest Firewood harvesting fodder Harvesting Harvest the field harvest Corn harvesting collection collection Firewood Land Prepare Fire Seedling of Fishing Weeding Plantation Leaf Field ploughing Fodder & fodder clearing line in the paddy grasses litter collection collection jungle

Cane Fertilizing Celebr Mustard Wheat Field crushing the farm ate Harvest harvest ploughing field Teez, weeding Gaura festival Forestation Celebrate Fertilizing Dashain the farm field FOOD INSECURITY PERIOD Celebrate Diwali

4.3.6 POVERTY: LIVING ON THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC MARGINS

Social exclusion is perhaps more profoundly experienced by groups like the Badi, a sub-group of Dalits. The Badi have traditionally earned their living by selling pottery and providing musical and dance entertainment during weddings and other community ceremonies. In more recent times, the Badi have lost out to modernity.

Having traditionally earned a living by selling pottery and through song and dance (entertainment), advancements in modern technology have robbed the Badi people of their livelihood. Owing to this, a majority of the Badi women are forced to engage in the flesh trade. The men make a living through mendicancy.21

21 ‘Housing demand from Administration’. Article in the national daily, Annapurna (undated): Basant Pratap Singh

Field Notes

Visiting the Badi tole (settlement) in the Bajang District headquarters, 13 members of the Badi community huddled on the riverbed, near their temporary homesteads, awaiting our arrival for the interview.

They began by claiming that the government program of 2009 that had promised to build them now homes had yet to deliver fully on their promise.

While the few men of the same community sat reticently in the back of the group, seemingly almost bereft of any public display of their masculinity, three women talked about the changes their community had undergone. They had no land to cultivate and as a result of the changing demands for entertainment, they were no longer able to earn incomes from sales of pottery or sing and dance in return for food and incomes.

Oblivious of the menfolk in the group, they complained of rampant alcoholism of the men in their community, repeatedly pointing to two men in their presence and admonishingly, demanding to know if they had had their “their quota for the day?”

In response to the question if he were in the military, a rather full-bodied young male in the group talked about having voluntarily left the army because he could not bear the ‘caste-baiting’ he suffered while in the service.

The most articulate of the group was a young woman who was clearly motivated to change things. She talked about receiving occupational skills training from a non- governmental organization, but refusing to travel to Kathmandu because of the negative connotation associated with becoming a masseuse for tourists in Thamel.

More disturbingly, many members of local CSOs expressed frustration with working with the Badi community. They offered the view that “these people were unwilling to help themselves”, having conducted several trainings for livelihood skills with no uptake. Most of the skills trainings consisted of goat-rearing, agricultural production, etc. When questioned if they had ever considered the option of providing the Badi with training skills to update and adapt their entertainment skills to meet more modern tastes and demands, the CSO members admitted they had never considered this as a realistic option.

In Mugu District, a visit to the Dalit community proved to be a remarkable learning experience. A group of young Dalit musicians (Karnali Art Center) had turned their traditional musical craft into street theater performances with social messages, on demand by non- governmental organizations in the area.

4.4 SUMMARY While there has been tremendous progress for gender equality and women’s emancipation in Nepal’s policy environment, there are yet structural obstacles to achieving gender equality and women’s empowerment. Similarly, the post-1990 period of multiparty democracy in Nepal has granted recognition to 26 Dalit groups, they continue to represent the poorest community across all poverty measures.

However, the status of women and Dalits determines their ability to participate. Women are time-poor, and suffer from heavy work burdens and limited mobility. Dalits suffer from limited access to opportunities, and the historical and existing consequences of social exclusion that manifest most profoundly in high rates of alcoholism, inability to find and maintain jobs, and incessant poverty. In looking ahead, it becomes important for the Paani Program to explore ways of increasing people’s participation in meaningful ways. One way forward is to integrate a framework for participation that is based on incremental steps for moving forward. The framework is a useful way to view to engender meaningful participation in incremental stages. RECOMMENDATIONS & NEXT STEPS The following recommendations are based on several considerations. The first consideration to take into account is what can realistically be achieved in the limited time prior to the end of 2020 when the project is estimated to end; Second, GESI considerations should be integrated into Strategic Approaches of the Program, rather than as stand-alone inputs. Third, GESI capacity interventions should be based on careful selection of partner organizations that can potentially deliver the short term or intermediate term GESI outcomes that have been outlined below; Finally, there are two sets of actions or inputs that need to be considered simultaneously: i) actions/inputs by the Paani management; and ii) actions by the GESI team.

WHAT MANAGEMENT MUST DO RECOMMENDATION 1: Integrate GESI outcomes, that are contained in the Strategic Action Plan for GESI contained below, into the program’s monitoring and evaluation system ➢ The GESI-outcomes are developed to elaborate the four Intermediate Results and the key corresponding Contract specified Outcomes contained in the Paani Program document (see Strategic Action Plan for GESI below)

RECOMMENDATION 2: Develop accountability for GESI ➢ This can be achieved in two ways; i) encourage existing grantees to report on GESI outcomes, even though their approved proposals limit their delivery and reporting on GESI-outputs ii) require new grant proposals to adhere to GESI-outcomes

RECOMMENDATION 3: Screen all new proposals and reports for GESI ➢ Have the gender coordinator screen proposals and reports to ensure for GESI process and outcome compliance RECOMMENDATION 4: Apply a mechanism for tracking and reporting on GESI expenditure ➢ The Paani management way also want to consider the adoption of an additional activity that supports accountability to employ a tracking mechanism that shows how project resources or benefits are distributed among various stakeholder groups such as women and DAGS. This mechanism has been developed by the Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC), and could potentially be adapted for Paani requirements.

RECOMMENDATION 5: Explore and develop partnerships for GESI ➢ Identify and develop partnerships with other organizations that have specific experience with GESI integration in technical sector programs (e.g. forestry, energy, agriculture, environment) to secure advice and expertise

WHAT GESI – TEAM MUST DO RECOMMENDATION 6: Develop GESI training materials ➢ Revisit GESI training content and integrate a diversity component to the material. These should be translated into Nepali and made accessible to partners for easy implementation.

RECOMMENDATION 7: Provide trainings on GESI and diversity – integrated planning ➢ The selection of partners should include an assessment based on the following: i) partners with the most potential to deliver GESI outcomes given the limited time remaining in the project life; ii) adopt a ‘learning by doing’ approach, which involves the Paani GESI team directly providing trainings to user groups, and CSO group members being present.

RECOMMENDATION 8: Ensure development of GESI-integrated action plans ➢ Each training should result in the development of action plans that are: i) fungible; ii) and ensures GESI is integrated into a selected and appropriate Strategic Approach of the Paani Program, rather than a stand-alone GESI activity plan.

RECOMMENDATION 9: Secure funding for local action plans ➢ Assess the availability of funds to support the action plans that will be the output of each capacity workshop. It is critical to ensure that funds are available for action plans to ensure that participation in user groups are linked to people’s livelihood needs. Towards this, the GESI team, with support from Paani Management, should enter into discussions with concerned local government that may allocate some funds for user groups in their constituency. Paani Management may also consider allocating funds to support these action plans developed as an output of the workshops

RECOMMENDATION 10: Conduct outcome mapping ➢ At the end of 2019, make plans to measure social changes that result from capacity interventions. Based on the short term and intermediate term results contained in the GESI matrix; i) develop a baseline prior to the capacity interventions; ii) conduct a measurement at the end of 2019.

ANNEXES

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 34

ANNEX 1: STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN FOR GESI INTEGRATION IN PAANI PROGRAM

INTERMEDIATE RESULTS CONTRACT SPECIFIED GESI-OUTCOMES INDICATORS REQUIRED INPUTS/ACTIONS OUTCOMES

First Order: Commitments to plans & resources Long Term outcomes Outcome mapping results MANAGEMENT Institutional assessments of Integrated enabling structures (funding & in kind support local governments that • Local user groups actively developed and institutional demonstrate the level of collaborate in the design and local stakeholder • Integrate GESI Outcomes, that arrangements formalized implementation of plans with consultations in planning & are contained in the matrix local governments budgeting below, into the Program’s • User groups are able to draw Monitoring and Evaluation

down resources from local System governments and other external resources • % of action plans are in process of implementation through funding support • Develop Accountability for from local governments and GESI Short term outcome Paani

• % Of action plans resulting from • Screen all new proposals and GESI-integrated planning reports for GESI workshops developed by user groups are funded

• Apply a mechanism for tracking and reporting on GESI Second Order: • Increased capacity of user Long Term outcomes • Outcome mapping expenditure groups, especially women • Bank statements Change in relationships, capacities, and marginalized groups, to • Increased decision -making roles of • Assets inventory and behaviors sustainably use freshwater • Knowledge surveys women and DAGs in water • Develop Partnerships with biodiversity resources • Knowledge recall surveys management decisions. organizations that have GESI • Improved capacity of local • Outcome mapping results that experience communities to develop show behavioral and climate smart green Intermediate outcomes institutional changes infrastructure

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 35

• Increased understanding of • Increased incomes contributing to GESI TEAM GESI issues and water food security

resources management • Conversion of income into assets • Increased dialogue and inclusion in water • Develop GESI training materials management decisions Short term outcomes Provide trainings on GESI and (including women and Diversity - integrated Planning DAGs) • Increased knowledge • Ensure development of GESI- • Behavioral and Institutional changes integrated Action Plans: • Increased income generating • Ensure funding source for local opportunities available action plans • Conduct Outcome Mapping Third Order: • Hydropower operators Long term outcomes • Record of FPIC (Free and adopt mitigation measures Prior Informed Consent)22 Emerging social, economic and that reduce threats to process implementation • Increased voice of local water resources & biodiversity freshwater biodiversity, communities in hydropower adapt to climate change & benefits development decisions that increase benefits to impact them • Statements of women and communities DAGs and community members • Increased access by women, DAGs and local communities to incomes, employment and other benefits Fourth Order: • Human well-being Long term outcome • Women and DAGS improved Engagement with funding Freshwater ecological processes • sources Water uses balanced and • Emergence: Movement from and values conserved • sustainably managed ‘private’ to ‘public’ spaces Engagement in policy forums across diverse interests (e.g. local, provincial, • Economic options national diversified • Community-led type participation, especially by women and DAGS that is able to draw - down external resources and able to give inputs into demand - driven project design

22 Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right that pertains to indigenous peoples. The FPIC process can be adapted to local communities’ rights by ensuring a mechanism, that allows them to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their surrounding lands and/or livelihoods.

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 36

ANNEX 2: ACTION PLAN

Recommendations Process/Steps Time

ACTIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

1. Integrate GESI Outcomes, that are 1. M&E team to consult and select relevant outcomes to be included in Paani M&E mechanism. January/February 2019 contained in the Strategic Action Plan 2. The selection should focus on SMART criteria, particularly what is achievable in the remaining time of the for GESI contained below, into the project Program’s Monitoring and Evaluation 3. Present the GESI outcomes to the Chief of Party System 4. Include GESI outcomes in the MEL plan 5. Submit them to USAID for approval 6. Include a section for GESI progress in quarterly and annual report which does not currently exist

2. Develop Accountability for GESI 1. Adjust existing reporting mechanism to include outcome reporting January/February 2019 2. GESI outcomes reporting needs to be reviewed by GESI team to ensure that GESI outcomes are actually related to GESI and can be used for further reporting internally or the mission under GESI progress in program 3. Ensure existing grantees to report on GESI outcomes, even though their approved proposals limit their delivery and reporting on GESI-outputs 4. Require new grant proposals to adhere to GESI-outcomes and follow reporting mechanism in the MEL plan of grantees that also includes GESI outcomes and reporting on it. 3. Screen all new proposals and reports 1. Have the GESI team screen proposals and reports to ensure for GESI process and outcome compliance All 2019 for GESI

4. Apply a mechanism for tracking and 1. Management to deliberate and decide upon the usefulness of adopting a tracking mechanism to show resource January/February 2019 reporting on GESI expenditure distribution among stakeholder groups 2. Depending on the outcome of the deliberation, look for various options for tracking mechanisms 3. Consider the simple tracking tool developed by the Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC) and assess its viability for Paani 4. If accepted, the tracking should be overseen by M&E and GESI team for further analysis and reporting to the Program 5. The frequency of the reporting can be done annually 5. Explore and Develop Partnerships 1. List all the existing partnerships Early 2019 for GESI 2. Assess them for their GESI expertise and potential inputs to Paani 3. Explore new partners who have experience in GESI specifically in the following sectors: water resources, agriculture, forestry, environment, energy and policy influence

ACTIONS FOR GESI TEAM

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 37

6. Develop GESI training materials 1. Assess existing training materials for gaps February/March 2019 2. Add a diversity component to the training material 3. Develop training sessions based on specific sectors relevant to Paani 7. Provide trainings on GESI and 1. Select the sites based on relevant criteria (i)those that are most promising in terms of interest and outcome; May 2019 Diversity - integrated Planning to (ii)those that need GESI inputs selected (i) user groups, (ii) local 2. Consult with management and SA leads on prioritizing target group selection keeping in mind the (i) limited governments human resources, and (ii) limited time of project life 3. Develop and conduct post workshop knowledge surveys to serve as a baseline 8. Ensure development of GESI- 1. The aim of each training should be to produce an action plan that is based on an activity of the Strategic May/June 2019: Following each integrated Action Plans Approach, and that is GESI integrated 2. The action plan should be fungible and time bound. training

9. Secure funding source for local 1. Consult management on securing funds for action plans of user groups February 2019 action plans 2. Identify other potential funding sources such as local governments for matching funds 3. Once funds are secured, the disbursement and management of the grants should be facilitated by the grantees concerned.

10. Conduct Outcome Mapping 1. Develop survey questionnaire for knowledge, income, and leadership domains/outcomes March – November 2019 2. Code the survey questions 3. In consultation with management and SA leads identify the criteria for site selection (site with most potential for social outcomes; limited human resource; limited time of project life) 4. Develop a sample size from selected sites/watersheds/basins working with M & E team 5. Implement survey 6. Analyze date 7. Write up the lessons

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 38

ANNEX 3: REFERENCES REVIEWED AND CITED PAANI PROGRAM SMALL GRANTS PROPOSALS

• Strengthening knowledge on healthy watersheds: Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (2018-2019) • Sustainable Economic Growth through Freshwater Biodiversity Conservation in the Rapti River: Human Welfare and Environment Protection Center (2018-2019) • Promoting Environment Friendly Roads and Climate-Smart Watershed Management Practices in the Middle Karnali Watershed (2018-2019) • Development update of DRR Harmonized Local Adaptation Plans for Action in Thuligad Watershed, Doti. Eco Agro D.R.M. Pvt. Ltd. (2018-2019) • Climate Smart Watershed Management in the Thuligad Watershed. Center of Research for Environment Energy and Water. (2018-2019) • Fostering Indigenous Sustainable Harvest for Climate Resilient Livelihoods in Middle Karnali Watershed of Karnali River Basin. Resources Himalaya Foundation. (2018-2019) • Effective and Efficient Water Use Technique to Combat Climate Change. People’s Help Group. (2018-2019) • JAL KACHAHARI: A multi-stakeholder process for resilient water resources management in Karnali Basin. Karnali Integrated Rural Development and Research Center. (2018-2019) • Strengthening Community Resilience in Rangun Khola and Lower Mahakali Watersheds. Nepal National Social Welfare Association. (2018-2019) • Jhimruk Khola Watershed Management Project. Mallarani Rural Development Concern Center. (2018-2019) • Karnali River Corridor Management Project. Nepal River Conservation Trust. (2018-2019) • Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation Project. Balchaur Forest and Environment Resource Development Center. (2018-2019) • Increasing community resilience and freshwater biodiversity conservation in lower Karnali River basin, Nepal. Samudayik Sarathi. (2018-2019) • Mapping and Assessing Pollution Stresses on Water Resources in Five Watersheds in Midwestern and Far Western Nepal. Youth Alliance for Environment. (2018-2019) • Political Economy Analysis to Identify Champions for Freshwater Policy Change and Conservation for Aquatic Biodiversity. Institute for Social and Environmental transition. (2018- 2019) • River Health and Biodiversity Profiling in the Karnali and West Rapti Watersheds: Implications to Basin Planning and Sustainable Resource Management in Western Nepal. Kathmandu University (2018-2019) • Community-Based Watershed Management Initiatives in the Lower Mahakali Watershed. National Environment and Equity Development Society. (2018-2019)

PAANI DOCUMENTS

• Annual Work Plan: Year Three. Paani Program. July 2018.

OTHER

• A Common Framework for Gender Equality and Social Inclusion. GESI Working Group: International Development Partners Group, Nepal. 2017.

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 39

• Gender and Social Inclusion in local water planning: Lessons from water use master plan practices in Nepal. ICIMOD Working Paper, 2017/16. • The National Sanitation and Hygiene Master Plan 2011. • Water use master plan preparation guidelines. Lalitpur, Nepal. WARM-P/HELVETAS: Rural Village Water Resource Management Project (2011). HELVETAS and ICIMOD • W+ Methods on Education and Knowledge; Income/Assets; Leadership; Time. www.wplus.org

PEER REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS

• Aasland, A and T. Fløtten (2001). “Ethnicity and Social Exclusion in Estonia and Latvia” in Europe- Asia Studies, Vol. 53, No. 7. (Nov., 2001), Pp. 1023-1049. • Francis, P. (1997). “Social Capital, Civil Society and Social Exclusion” in Kothari, Uma and Matin Minouge (eds) “Development Theory and Practice: Critical Perspectives”. Hampshire: Palgrav • Gurung, B. 2018. W+ Leadership Method. www.wplus.org • Gurung, B. 2018. W+ Education and Knowledge Method. www.wplus.org • Hall, A.J. 2002. “Innovation Systems and Capacity Development: Agenda for North-South Research Collaboration?” International Journal of Technology Management and Sustainable Development 1 (3): 146-152. • Rawal, N. 2018. Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, Vol 2. 2018. pp. 178. • Nelson, R, and S. Winter. 1982. “An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change” Cambridge: Belknap Press

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 40

ANNEX 4: CHECKLIST OF KEY ITEMS FOR AN ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS23

POLICIES AND ACTIONS

• Is GESI integrated in policies of the organization? In which ones? • Does a GESI policy exist with regard to its “products” (programs, projects, training etc.) – an external policy and/or an internal policy? • If so, to whom does the policy refer (men/women; professional/support/field staff etc.?) What issues does it address: conditions and/or positions? • Is the policy on GESI operationalized and not just a piece of paper in a drawer? • Are activities to address GESI issues at organizational and/or at program level part of the action plans of the organization? Are they implemented? • Is there sufficient budget available and used to implement these activities? • Are indicators used to measure the outcomes and impacts of the activities related to GESI? • Are data of M&E systems differentiated according to gender? What is done with M&E information on GESI?

TASKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

• How many men and women are employed at what levels (in each department, division, unit etc.) and in what positions? • Are there any differences between tasks and responsibilities assigned to men and women? If so, where and in what way? • Do special procedures and rules exist for men and women? What are the implications? • Do male and female staffs both have access to the same information? • At what levels, units, and in what positions are gender issues dealt with? • In which tasks and responsibilities is concern for gender within the organization and with the programs included? Do staff work according to these tasks and responsibilities? • Does everyone in the organization know about the tasks and responsibilities of staff concerned with gender issues? • Are information flows about GESI issues within the organization and its programs existing and operating? • Are activities related to gender in various sectors or departments well-coordinated? • Are procedures and rules supportive to addressing GESI issues?

EXPERTISE

• Are male and female staffs adequately trained to address GESI issues? • Do job descriptions include reference to GESI? • Are the sexes equally represented at all levels and/or are measures taken to balance it or overcome constraints?

23 Women Organizing for Change in Agriculture and Natural Resource Development (WOCAN) www.wocan.org: adapted from: Groverman, V. and Gurung, J. 2002. ICIMOD Training Manual.

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 41

• Are new staff members carefully selected in terms of GESI sensitivity and capacity? • Are new staff members sufficiently introduced to the way the organization deals with GESI issues? • Is GESI a topic, which is discussed during performance appraisal interviews? • Are staff members regularly trained to keep expertise up to standard in the field of GESI?

POLICY INFLUENCE

• Are bodies of people who have a say in the running of the organization (such as board of directors, management, informal opinion leaders) aware of and supportive to address GESI issues? • Does the management consult others within and outside the organization with regard to GESI (e.g. staff, researchers, GESI specialists, women’s networks)? • Are the opinions/requirements of external stakeholders taken seriously by the management (e.g. men and women of the target groups, pressure groups, donors, business community etc.)?

DECISION MAKING

• Which men and women of what positions belong to decision-making bodies? • What roles do men and women play in the decision-making? • Which male and female staffs are involved in which decision-making process? • Are the situation and interests of men and women taken into account in decision making – at what level and of what nature (e.g. working conditions, programs etc.)? • Are decisions related to gender issues in the work and in the organization dealt with adequately without a male or female bias? • Are control mechanisms existing in the organization (financial, reporting, quality control etc.) equally applied towards men or women?

ROOM FOR INNOVATION /MANOEUVRE

• Does the right space exist for both men and women to work to their satisfaction? Is there any difference in the degree to which men and women have to ask permission to undertake certain actions or to deviate from their jobs? • Does the right space exist to work towards gender equity and social inclusion? Is there room for discussion and actions?

ORGANIZATIONAL SYMBOLS

• Does the consideration of gender roles and relations and addressing gender issues fit the image of the organization? • What is the reputation of the organization according to outsiders – is it considered being gender sensitive or gender friendly and inclusive? • Does the staff share values and norms with regard to gender equity and social inclusion within the organization and in its programs? • Does the organization demonstrate gender-friendly and socially inclusive behavior in terms of language used, jokes, comments, procedures on sexual harassment, style of meetings etc.?

COOPERATIONA ND LEARNING

• Do male, female staffs support each other in the work and in solving problems?

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 42

• Is attention paid to team building involving men and women and is it valued? • Is work related to gender performed in teams and/or are people responsible to addressing gender issues supported by others? • Is there a willingness to learn and cope with institutional changes, especially in the field of gender? • Are new ideas in the field of gender communicated and integrated in the different disciplines/divisions etc.? • Is there a willingness to cooperate with institutions/individuals outside the organization on gender issues?

ATTITUDE

• Do individual staff members demonstrate commitment towards gender equity in the organization and in its programs? • Do individual staff members accept responsibility to address gender issues in the organization and its programs? • Are individual staff members motivated show readiness, adapt easily to changes related to gender? • Do individual staff members show positive attitudes towards colleagues expressing concern about gaps in the position and conditions of women relative to men (without stereotyping)? • Do staffs demonstrate gender sensitive behavior outside of the office towards women in general?

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 43

ANNEX 5: TOOLS FROM GENDER ANALYSIS

THE ACTIVITY PROFILE

This tool identifies all relevant productive and reproductive tasks and addressed the question: WHO DOES WHAT?

How much detail you need depends on the nature of your project. Those areas of activity, which the project will be directly involved in, require the greatest detail. For instance, an activity profile for an agricultural project would list, according to the gender division of labor, each agricultural activity (such as land clearance, preparation, and so on) for each crop, or each type of field. Depending on the context, other parameters may also be examined:

Gender and age denominations: identifying whether the adult women, adult men, their children, or the elderly carry out an activity;

Time allocations: specifying what percentage of time is allocated to each activity, and whether it is carried out seasonally or daily;

Activity locus: specifying where the activity is performed, in order to reveal people’s mobility. Is work done at home, in the family field, the family shop, or elsewhere (within or beyond) the community?

Activities can be grouped into three categories:

Production: This includes the production of goods and services for income or subsistence. It is the work done which is mainly recognized and valued as work by individuals and societies, and which is most commonly included in national economic statistics. Both women and men perform productive work, but not all of this is valued in the same way.

Reproduction: This encompasses the care and maintenance of the household and its members, such as cooking, washing, cleaning, nursing, bearing children and looking after them, building and maintaining shelter. This work is necessary, yet it is rarely considered of the same value as productive work. It is normally unpaid and is not counted in conventional economic statistics. Women mostly do it.

Community: This included all the community activities that household members engage in. These could include communal labor, attending religious ceremonies, marriages, political meetings, training workshops and so forth.

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 44

THE ACCESS AND CONTROL PROFILE – RESOURCES AND BENEFITS

This enables users to list what resources people use to carry out the tasks identified in the Activity Profile. It indicates whether women or men have access to resources, who controls their use, and who controls the benefits of a household’s (or a community’s) use of resources. Access simply means that you are able to use a resource, but this says nothing about whether you have control over it. For example, women may have some access to local political processes but little influence or control over which issues are discussed and the final decisions. The person who controls a resource is the one ultimately able to make decisions about its use, including whether it can be sold.

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 45

ANNEX 6: FRAMEWORK FOR GESI ANALYSIS OF PAANI PROGRAM GESI ANALYSIS: COMMUNITY LEVEL/ USER GROUPS

Hypothesis Key Questions Method Tool Schedule

Women (and men) have knowledge through Who does what? Activity Profile Focus Groups • To be decided in consultation with PANI gender specialist; project staff their extensive contribution to household etc. production Interviews

Women are ‘time poor’ How many hours do women (and men) 24 Hour Time Clock Focus Groups • To be decided in consultation with PANI gender specialist; project staff spend on their daily activities etc. Interviews

Women (and male members of disadvantaged Who has access over resources? Access & Control Profile Focus Groups • To be decided in consultation with PANI gender specialist; project staff groups) have limited access to resources (e.g. etc. services, markets etc.) Interviews

Women (and male members of disadvantaged Observation groups) have limited decision making opportunities Who decides over use of resources?

GESI ANALYSIS: INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL

Hypothesis Key Questions Method Tool Schedule

Service providing institutions / What are the existing GESI capacities of service Key elements of the first level Secondary Data Review of secondary data Implementing Organizations have providers? of the 9 Box Organizational • Action plans limited GESI Analysis capacity Framework Workshop or meetings with key • Reports What institutional gaps and opportunities exist for Implementing Organizations (Rural Focus Groups integrating GESI issues into the planning, design, Municipalities; Line Agencies; Implementing implementation and monitoring & evaluation of partners/local NGOs etc.) projects?

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 46

ANNEX 7: INTERVIEWS AND MAPPING EXERCISES WITH FOCUS GROUPS NAME LOCATION SUMMARY

Radha Badi Resident of Badi Tole # 10 • Badi were traditional entertainers and pottery makers • Most families are landless • High rate of alcoholism among men Bhajang • Women are engaged in income generation • Males have difficulty adjusting to present situations and resorting to daily wage labor or even begging at times • Radha Badi demonstrates significant leadership qualities

Tika Magar Supervisor, Women’s • Great need for training on GESI; needs assessment for planning; leadership; local organizational development • Institutional ‘gender blindness’ in local government Department, Bhajang • Women’s department has little voice in local government planning Municipality

Krishna Raj Neupane District Forest Officer • Food insecurity was identified as a major problem in local communities • Local Community Forestry User Groups have strict compliance with GESI considerations for participation • Pointed out some key challenges for effective participation of women are poor communication skills, time poverty, work burden, Bhajang nutrition deficit, food insecurity, resistance based on local norms and values regarding women’s mobility. • However, in spite of these challenges women are still the key members in community forestry user groups.

Deputy Mayor, Jaya Prithivi • Roles/responsibilities for elected members not clearly defined in the new administrative architecture • Decisions are made unilaterally by the mayor Municipality, Bhajang • Little room to demand funds for women’s development as local budgets come in ‘basket funds’ Juna Jagari • The major focus of rural development is infrastructure development, with very little focus on capacity development • Need for capacity development on GESI (Rights based trainings)

Executive Committee • Dalits have no voice in decision making in the local government • There is strong resistance towards discussion about inclusion in local planning Member of the Rural • She feels she is viewed by other elected officials as a “token” representative of the Dalit community, and should be “grateful” to be in Gita Devi Kami Municipality, Bhajang the government • She insists she is not “disheartened” by such resistance, and is committed to persevere in her struggle for women’s and Dalit rights

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 47

Jalabogoti Vice Chairperson, Alital • Lack of transparency in planning • Major part of the budget is allocated to infrastructure. Only 13% of the budget is allocated for social development programs such as Rural Municipality prevention of Gender-based Violence; improved nutrition for pregnant and lactating mothers; women’s hygiene • Lack skills for inclusive planning • Severe river damage to paddy land in the area that occurred about 12 years ago • Reforestation program is very successful, and prevented further flooding and soil erosion • Road building has been given priority in local government plans, but she acknowledges the poor building practices have contributed to environmental damage • She identified income generation activities should be a key focus of the local government. Lack of income opportunities has resulted in large numbers of local males migrating to India and beyond for several months of the year. Women have to manage households and the farm production by themselves. This adds to their existing work burden. • Capacity needs for the local government: access to information on laws and policies for GESI; GESI-integrated planning.

Padma Yogi FECOFUN, Dailekh • Major challenge to GESI integration is that attitudes in the community remain largely unchanged. • In development planning, it is difficult to move beyond participation by numbers to more meaningful participation that includes Municipality decision-making by women and members of disadvantaged social groups. • In their own activities, FECOFUN exceeds the national requirement of 33% participation by women and DAGs to 50%. Their objective in implementing Paani program activities is to ensure 50% participation by women and members of DAGs • Existing challenges of FECOFUN network members: need skills development for leadership, GESI-integrated planning; Access to information on RIGHTS; Training of Trainers

Parbati Bisunka Provincial Member of • Triple forms of discrimination for Dalit women Parliament, Dailekh

Chinkala Rakaya Early Childhood • Discussion on the death of her two infant children from pneumonia attributed to Chaupadia/Goth • The practice of banishing women to an outside shed during times of “impurity” associated with her menstrual cycle and pregnancy is Development Teacher. still prevalent, even though the practice has been banned by the government Murma 9, Mugu District

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 48

Radhika Malla Chairperson, Karnali • High degree of women’s and members of DAGS participation in user groups attributed to GESI compliance • However, women and members of DAGs are not in leadership positions in user or community groups. In cases where there is Ekikrit Mahila Bikash Sangh, “token” representation by such members, decisions are still made by influential male members of the group Gumgadhi, Mugu Rara • Recommended provision of women and DAG empowerment through interventions focused on economic empowerment • There is also a need for providing access to information channels that informs women and DAGs of their rights and roles provided under the constitution.

Jabra Sonahar Barghar, Rajapur 1, Sona • The discussion focused on the traditional system of resource management among the Tharu community in Bardiya • The key person in the traditional system is known as the Barghar, whose role it is to facilitate community engagement for a number of Tol, Bardiya District community-based activities, to identify and prioritize development needs, and manage community labor for road and irrigation canal construction and repair.

Hydropower affected Airawati 2, Baraula, • Chandra Prasad Shrestha, one of the affected community member said “we were so happy and excited when we heard about the electricity facilities coming to our village and never thought of any other consequences that we might face in the cost of light.” Later, community Pyuthan, Jhimrik we started facing consequences such as decreasing level of water, decrease in availability of fishes, lack of water for irrigation facilities, decreasing state of substance agriculture farming. • Community members also stated that they were not made aware of their rights to resources and their stake over the BPC project • They stated that that they did not have access to the BPC royalty deposited to the district office as compensation to locally affected groups • The community has been affected in several ways by the construction of the hydropower plant: depleted fish stocks in the river system; loss of irrigation water to their lands • As a result, many households migrate to India in search of seasonal work to supplement incomes and guard against food insecurity • The major ethnic groups affected by the hydropower plant construction are Raut, Kumal, Magar and Gurung.

MRDCC Staff members, Pyuthan • Limited capacity for GESI integration particularly at outcome level • Were uncertain how to report (un) intended GESI related outcomes in the current Paani project reporting structure • However, they were keen to report on several GESI related outcomes that resulted from their previous and on-going interventions, particularly on economic empowerment • Requested capacity development interventions for GESI-integrated planning

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 49

Samudayik Sarathi Geruwa Rural Municipality, • Samudayik Sarathi established the Water Resource Conservation group (Sagarmatha water resource conservation group and Pragatisil water resource conservation group.) The total members of Sagarmatha water resource conservation group and Pragatisil water resource Rajipur-2 Sonaha Tole, conservation group are 25 and 23 respectively Bardiya District • Membership is comprised of women and members of DAGs • The aim of the groups is the conservation of water resources and maintenance of road sanitation. Lower Karnali watershed • The group also acts as a revolving fund for its members by collecting NPR 50 from each member and members take turns in accessing loans at a 2% interest rate. • Both groups are not aware about the planning processes of the ward and municipality. • Women cited their lack of education, lack of access to information and services, and their limited mobility combined with their work burden as limits to their ability to participate more meaningfully in community or group activities. • In addition to their new role for water resource conservation, the groups were initially established as community forestry user groups. • In their role as CFUGs, they also manage the Birsana nursery, sale of fuel wood from the community forest, sale of stone and sand from the river beds, and managing revolving funds for its members.

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 50

ANNEX 8: MAPPING EXERCISES

SEASONAL CALENDAR EXERCISE

Community: Sonaha Community, Rajapur, Bardiya

Watershed: Lower Karnali / Karnali –River Basin

Date: 5 December 2018

Figure 1: FGD with Sonaha Community, Rajapur Lower Karnali

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 51

January February March April May June July August September October November December

Labor Fishing Fishing Fishing Fishing Fishing During this month, Gold Gold Fishing Rhoda work they are affected by collection collection collection (mitigation Plantation of flood. People aren’t (very few) (very few) work) Paddy engaged in labor work nor they do fishing. They borrow money and foods from neighbor and grocery shop. They have stress because of fear of flooding. Rhoda Labor Wheat Rhoda Seedling Fishing Wood collection Fishing Fishing Gold Stone collection work harvesting Collection of paddy Collection collection Seasonal Labor Repairing Support on Wood Ploughing, Paddy Gold vegetables work cannel paddy collection planting of harvesting collection farming for plantation to vegetable plantation neighbor with wages Wheat, Working Potato’s and Wheat plus on the other harvest harvesting farm field vegetable plantation Fishing season (Sonaha community get more fishes in this season)

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 52

SORTING EXERCISE (PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES)

Community: Sonaha Community, Bardiya

Watershed: Lower Karnali

Date: 5 December 2018

Activities Ranking Fishing 1st

Gold Collection 2nd

Labor work (In Agriculture sector) 3rd

Rhoda Collection 4th

Agriculture 5th

Firewood Collection 6th

Community work (Road construction, plantation, Sanitation, Mitigation work etc.) 7th

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 53

SEASONAL CALENDAR EXERCISE

Community: Mixed group (natural resource management group), Alitaal Rural Municipality, Dadeldhura District

Watershed: Rangun

Date: 26 November 2018

Figure 2: FGD with Natural Resource Conservation at Rangun Watershed

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 54

January February March April May June July August September October November December

Mustard Mustard Firewood, Wheat Corn Ploughing the Paddy Paddy Corn harvesting Paddy Paddy harvesting Firewood harvesting harvesting graze Harvesting Harvest field harvest harvest harvesting collection collection

Firewood, Firewood, Pruning, Prepare Fire Seedling of Fishing Weeding Plantation Leaf litter Field Field ploughing Graze graze graze Bushes line in the paddy grasses ploughing collection collection collection cleaning jungle

Sugarcane Fertilizing Celebrate Teez, Mustard Wheat harvest Field ploughing, crushing the farm Gaura festival Harvest weeding field

Forestation Celebrate Fertilizing the Dashain farm field

FOOD INSECURITY PERIOD Celebrate Diwali

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 55

SEASONAL CALENDAR EXERCISE

Community: Mixed group (natural resource management group), Alitaal Rural Municipality, Dadeldhura District

Watershed: Rangun

Date: 26 November 2018

Activities Ranking

Agriculture 1st

Livestock 2nd

Labor work/ India Migration 3rd

Seasonal Vegetables 4th

Business 5th

Natural Resource Management (Forestation, water source conservation) 6th

Community work (Temple, school, road construction) 7th

Job 8th

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 56

DAILY ACTIVITY CLOCK EXERCISE

Community: Water resource conservation group (FGD with mixed women group – Thara and Sonaha), Geruwa Rural Municipality, Bardiya District

Watershed: Lower Karnali

Date: 5 December 2018

Figure 3: FGD with Water Resource Conservation Group at Bardiya, Rajipur

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 57

Time Activities 5.00-5.30 Wake up 5.30-7.00 Cleaning house, cleaning utensils, cleaning patio 7.00-8.00 Cooking, Caring children, weeding 8.00-10.00 Ready to kids for school, Pick up to kids at school, Having lunch, Cleaning kitchen 10.00-5.00 - Fishing - Gold Collection - Labor work - Feeding to livestock in the jungle, collection graze and wood - Attend community meeting, training - Most of time they spend in the river - Community work 5.00-6.00 Back to home from river and jungle, Washing utensils, weeding and watering the vegetable farm 6.00-7.00 Preparing dinner 7.00-8.00 - Serving dinner to family and kids, cleaning kitchen, washing utensils, tidy the bed, teaching to kids 8.00-9.00 Watching TV, playing mobile 9.00 Go to bed

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 58

INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT

Community: Janasakati anti-poaching group, Tikapur-2, Rajipur, Kailali District. Group formed by Bafer Nepal. (Total members: 13 includes 6 male, 7 female / 6 Dalit, 6 Janajati, 1 BCT.)

Watershed: Lower Karnali

Established: 13 August 2018

Figure 4: FGD with CFUG/Anti-Poaching Group at Tikapur, Kailali

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 59

Activities Responsibility Policy Problems Demand Internal External Information of fish breeding season, suitable time for fishing reproduction stage of species, etc. To control poaching of fish, Patrolling to control No any policy was developed No any written anti-poaching No clearly define the role Fisheries Management boar, dear, birds destructive fishing (men) under committee policies and guideline of committee members in written version To give security in the river Information dissemination No any mixed date for Committee member just give No identity card as an Orientation on Government side to men if seeing destructing committee’s meeting threats verbally to those Anti-poaching committee Anti-Poaching policies, rules and fishing (women) people who do destructive member so very difficult to regulation fishing. control destructive fishing without any identification. Community people do not believe and stop destructive fishing. To sensitize the community Control to destructive Government has Anti- No any incentive while Support to make strong on destructive fishing fishing (men and women) poaching policy but not in the patrolling to control coordination with ward and committee destructive fishing. municipality by Paani

They have conducted Awareness campaign against Less priority regarding the Joint advocacy to formulate local committee’s meeting only 2 destructive fishing (both) destructive fishing issues in policy on anti- poaching times since it was formed. local government.

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 60

ANNEX 9: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ATTENDING FOCUS GROUPS

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – FGD WITHHYDROPOWER / IRRIGATION COMMITTEE, SCHOOL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, LOCAL ELECTED BODIES, WOMEN GROUP – KEDARSIUE, RM JHOTA BAHANG, NOV.22, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Sridevi Singh Hotel Manager Jhota, Bajhang

2 Deurupa Thapa Community Member Jhota, Bajhang

3 Padam Bahadur Dhami Kedasieu RM G.S.S. Member Jhota, Bajhang

4 Ahendna Bahadur Shahi Kedarsieu RM-9 Ward member Jhota, Bajhang

5 Kalak Odd Kedarsieu RM-9 Ward Member Jhota, Bajhang

6 Deepak Bahadur Bohora School Teacher Jhota, Bajhang

7 Deependra Raj Mishra Health Post Public Health Inspector Jhota, Bajhang

8 Dil Bahadur Bist School Teacher Jhota, Bajhang

9 Akkal Bahadur Bohora School Teacher Jhota, Bajhang

10 Dhirendra Bahadur Malla School Teacher Jhota, Bajhang

11 Dhurba Bahadur Shahi Shop Businessman Jhota, Bajhang

12 Lal Bahadur Aire Community Member Jhota, Bajhang

13 Mohan Raj Dhami Shop Businessman Jhota, Bajhang

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 61

14 Chhanchu Sarki Irrigation Committee Member Jhota, Bajhang

15 Putali Sarki Irrigation Committee Member Jhota, Bajhang

16 Gangumati B.K. Irrigation Committee Member Jhota, Bajhang

17 Kausilla B.K. Community Member Jhota, Bajhang

18 Ishwor Parki Community Member Jhota, Bajhang

19 Nar Bahadur Oli Irrigation Committee Member Jhota, Bajhang

20 Siddharaj B.K. Irrigation Committee Member Jhota, Bajhang

21 Madana Oli Irrigation Committee Member Jhota, Bajhang

22 Nar Bahadur Damai Irrigation Committee Member Jhota, Bajhang

23 Mangal Khadka CFUG Citizen scientist Jhota, Bajhang

24 Ganesh B.K. Paani RBTL Nepalgunj

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 62

ANNEX 10: LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATION CONTACTED THALARA RURAL MUNICIPALITY, MALUMELA AAMBAGAR, 22 NOVEMBER 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Pyaru Sarki Community Thalara RM-9 Aambagar Bajhang

2 Govinda Bhandari Thalara RM-9 Aambagar Bajhang

3 Singh Raj Joshi Thalara RM-9 Aambagar Bajhang

4 Bir Bahadur Sarki Thalara RM-9 Aambagar Bajhang

5 Bal Ram Bhandari Thalara RM-9 Aambagar Bajhang

6 S Sarki Thalara RM-9 Aambagar Bajhang

7 Dharma Sarki “

8 Manisha Damai “

9 Mulu Damai “

10 Rumala Sarki “

11 Joga Devi Sarki Thalara RM-9 Aambagar Bajhang

12 Narmada Joshi “

13 Sapana Nepali “

14 Bhuwan Joshi “

15 Bishna Devi Regmi “

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 63

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED FGD WITH BADI COMMUNITY – 23 NOV 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Ramesh Badi Badi Tole Jayprithvi Municipality -9

2 Ammar Badi Jayprithvi Municipality -9

3 Rekha Badi Jayprithvi Municipality -9

4 Deepak Badi “

5 Bamma Badi “

6 Rabi Badi “

7 Keudi Badi “

8 Keshari Badi “

9 Laxmi Badi “

10 Suraj Badi “

11 Janu Badi “

12 Dharam Badi “

13 Radha Badi “

14 Nira Badi “

15 Shovan Kami “

16 Mangal Bahadur Khadka “

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 64

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED FGD WITH ANTI-POACHING GROUPS / CFUG – 25 NOV. 2018, SIMALKHET- 6, PARSURAN MUNICIPALITY

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Gore Thapa School Management Committee Chairperson Parsuram Municipality -6, Thapathali

2 Dhan Bahadur Community Forest User Chair Person Parsuram Municipality -6, Sahargauda Kathayat Committee

3 Ramdatta Bhattarai Community Parsuram Municipality -6, Rampur

4 Prem Bahadur Saud Parsuram Municipality -6, Taligada

5 Man Bahadur Sarki Siddha Nath Primary School Parsuram Municipality -6, Taligada

6 Tul Bahadur Saud Parsuram Municipality -6, Taligada

7 Ruplal Dangi Chure Conservation Committee Chairperson Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

8 Ram Bahadur Saud Parsuram Municipality -6, Taligada

9 Chandra Bahadur Fishery Group Member Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet Thapa

10 Tulsi Bist Parsuram Municipality -6, Sahargauda

11 Ratan Thapa Parsuram Municipality -6, Thapathali

12 Bhan Bahadur Saud Fishery Group Parsuram Municipality -6, Motahalda

13 Lila Thapa Magar Fishery Group Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 65

14 Janaki Damai Fishery Group Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

15 Dammar Ranamagar Poor Alleviation Fund Secretary Parsuram Municipality -6, Damad

16 Nain SinghSaud Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

17 Sumit Thapa Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

18 Rita Thapa Fishery Group Member Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

19 Nirmala Saud Fishery Group Member Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

20 Chanamati Saud Fishery Group Member Parsuram Municipality -6, Simalkhet

21 Sujit Sinal NNSWA Field Officer Dadeldhura -5

22 Dhan Bahadur Kami NNSWA Field Supervisor Parsuram Mun.10

23 Keshab Thapa Poor Alleviation Fund Chairperson Parsuram Municipality -6, Thapathali

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 66

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED- FGD WITH NATURAL RESOSURCE CONSERVATION GROUPS, RANGUN

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Khagisara Roka Magar Natural Resource Conservation President Aaalital-7, Dola Godam Group-1

2 Bhagawati Damai Natural Resource Conservation Secretary Aaalital-8, Dola Godam Group

3 Paltiman Gharti “ Treasurer Aaalital-8, Dola Godam

4 Jasmati Thapa Magar “ Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam

5 Susila Rana Magar Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group

6 Bir Bahadur Mahara Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-7, Dola Godam Group

7 Sita Soude Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-7, Dola Godam Group

8 Bhaga Devi Parki Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-7, Dola Godam Group

9 Amrita Ale Magar Natural Resource Conservation President Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

10 Gopal Singh Damai Natural Resource Conservation Secretary Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 67

11 Lalita Bohara Natural Resource Conservation Treasurer Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

12 Dhana Devi Bohara Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

13 Deepa Bohora Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

14 Aantaram Maske Rana Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

15 Laxmi Sharki Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

16 Bhabi Thapa Magar Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-2

17 Gita B.K Natural Resource Conservation President Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-3

18 Janaki Bohara Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-3

19 Nirmala Karki Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-3

20 Manamati Dhami Natural Resource Conservation Member Aalital-8, Dola Godam Group-3

21 Gopal Hari Sharma Rural Development Center Trainer Kathmandu

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 68

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – MEETING WITH MRDCC, DEC 4, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Kamala Shakya MRDCC Vice Chairperson Pyuthan

2 Bhaskar Dev Paani WMS Pyuthan Chaudhary

3 Prabesh Kakshyepati MRDCC Executive Manager Pyuthan

4 Kiran Poudel MRDCC NRM Technician Pyuthan

5 Manjila Shrestha MRDCC AAFO Pyuthan

7 Sita Rasaily MRDCC Field Supervisor Pyuthan

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – FGD DALIT COMMUNITY, RAJAPUR-7, BHALUPHATA, DEC 5, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Mohan Lal Jaisi KIRDRAC Project Officer Bardiya

2 Puja Pariyar Rajapur-7, Bhaluphata

3 Maya Rajapur-7, Bhaluphata Bishwokarma

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 69

4 Laxmi B.K Rajapur-7, Bhaluphata

5 Laxmi Rasaily “

6 Sitala B.K “

7 Pabisara B.K “

8 Semlal B.K “

9 Prabad Pariyar “

10 Suraj B.K “

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – FGD WITH RANI, JAMARIYA, KULARIYA IRRIGATION USER COMMITTEE, DEC. 6, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Damodhar Khadka Rani ,Jamara, Kulariya Irrigation Main Vice- Tikapur Municipality -5, Committee Chairperson Kailali

2 Parsuram Mahato Rani ,Jamara, Kulariya Irrigation Main Secretary Tikapur Municipality -4, Committee Kailali

3 Gulab Devi Rani ,Jamara, Kulariya Irrigation Main Member Tikapur Municipality -2, Chaudhary Committee Kailali

4 Hira Devi Chaudhary Kulariya Irrigation Committee Member Janaki -7, Gulauri Kailali

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 70

5 Man Bahadur Jamara Irrigation Committee Secretary Janaki -3, Subarnapur Chaudhary

6 Bir Bahadur Khatri Rani Irrigation Committee Treasurer Janaki -3, Subarnapur

7 Lal Bir Chaudhary Jamara Irrigation Committee Chairperson Janaki-6, Kailali

8 Harijan Chhantyal Samudayik Sarathi District Baglung Coordinator

9 Pusparaj Tiwari Paani WMS Bardiya

10 Kangali Chaudhary Rani ,Jamara, Kulariya Irrigation Main Member Tikapur Municipality, Committee Kailali

11 Raj Kumari Singh Rani ,Jamara, Kulariya Irrigation Main Office Assistant Tikapur Mun-2, Kailali Committee

12 Pabitra Chaudhary Rani ,Jamara, Kulariya Irrigation Main Office Assistant Tikapur Mun-8, Kailali Committee

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 71

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – FGD WITH SONAHA COMMUNITY, RAJAPUR BARDIYA, DEC 5, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Shanti Sonaha Sonaha Bikash Samaj Chairperson Rajapur-1 Sonaha Tole

2 Karu Sonaha Sonaha Bikash Samaj Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Tole

3 Chotlal Sonaha Sonaha Bikash Samaj Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Tole

4 Khublal Sonaha Bikash Samaj Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Sonaha Tole

5 Indra Sonaha Sonaha Bikash Samaj Staff Rajapur-1 Sonaha Tole

6 Dil Bahadur Sonaha Bikash Samaj Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Sonaha Tole

7 Rama Sonaha Sonaha Bikash Samaj Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Tole

8 Geeta Sonaha Sonaha Bikash Samaj Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Tole

9 Mamta Sonaha Sanauta Agriculture Manager Rajapur-1 Sonaha Cooperative Tole

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 72

10 Parbati Sonaha Mother group Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Tole

11 Resham Sonaha Bikash Samaj Member Rajapur-1 Sonaha Sonaha Tole

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – FGD WITH WATER CONSERVATION GROUP, RAJIPUR BARDIYA, DEC 5, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address Contact No.

1 Kalasni Sonaha Geheru Rural Municipality -2, Rajipur -

2 Jagani Sonaha Geheru Rural Municipality -2, Rajipur

3 Pslti Sonaha “

4 Phulmati Sonaha Geheru Rural Municipality -2, Rajipur

5 Padma Sonaha “

6 Nitu Sonaha “

7 Maghi Sonaha “

8 Tulsi Sonaha “

9 Dharmi Sonaha “

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 73

10 Santosh Sonaha “

11 Nirmala Sonaha “

12 RamChnni Sonaha “

13 Karuna Sonaha “

14 Jagani Sonaha “

15 Janu Sonaha “

16 Pooja Sonaha “

17 Aasha Sonaha “

18 Geeta Sonaha “

19 Sarita Sonaha “

20 Aashika Sonaha “

21 Dil Kumari “ Sonaha

22 Simran Sonaha “

23 Renuka Sonaha “

24 Dinarani Sonaha “

25 Sunita Sonaha “

26 Kamala Sonaha “

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 74

27 Melina Chaudhary “

28 Anita Kumari “ Tharu

29 Dasariya Sonaha “

30 Kalpana Sonaha “

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – FGD WITH JANASAKATI COMMUNITY FOREST USER COMMITTEE, RAJAPUR-7, TIKAPUR MUNICIPALITY, KAILALI, DEC 6, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Sumitra Nagarji Janasakti CFUG Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

2 Chindi Devi Kasara Janasakti CFUG Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

3 Sarswoti Tiruwa Janasakti CFUG Vice Secretary Rajipur-2, Tikapur

4 Laxmi Odd Janasakti CFUG Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

5 Kiran Tiruwa Janasakti CFUG Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

6 Nima Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

7 Manju Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG Secretary Rajipur-2, Tikapur

8 Durga Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG User member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

9 Aarati Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG User member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

10 Sapana Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG User member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 75

11 Sundari Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG User member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

12 Prem Kumari Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG User member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

13 Rajkumari Chaudhary Janasakti CFUG User member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

14 Naina Chaudhary Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

15 Sarita Chaudhary Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

16 Mangri Devi Tharu Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

17 Kukuri Devi Tharu Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

18 Kalpana Chaudhary Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

19 Kangali Devi Tharu Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

20 Phulpati Devi Chaudhary Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

21 Ramphaliya Devi Tharu Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

22 Sher Bahadur B.K Janasakti Community Forest Ranger Rajipur-2, Tikapur

23 Kari Aauji Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

24 Rana Bahadur Dhami Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

25 Uday Singh Sunar Anti-Poaching Group Member Rajipur-2, Tikapur

26 Dirgha Bahadur Tiruwa Anti-Poaching Group Coordinator Rajipur-2, Tikapur

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 76

LIST OF PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED – MEETING WITH BAFER STAFFS/BOARD, LAMKI CHUWA MUNICIPALITY, DEC 6, 2018

S.N Name Organization Position Address

1 Puspa Raj Tiwari Paani WMS Chitwan, Bharatpur

2 Harijhan Chantyal Samudayik Sarathi DC Baglung

3 Rachana Rasaily Paani GESI specialist Kathmandu

4 Barun Gurung SNV STTA USA

5 Mamta Rawal BAFER Nepal Project Coordinator Lamkichuwa Municipality -1

6 Bhadra Kumari Shahi BAFER Nepal Social Mobilizer Lamkichuwa Municipality -1

7 Ujer Singh Sunar BAFER Nepal Chair Person Lamkichuwa Municipality -1

8 Rabina Dhakal BAFER Nepal Accountant Lamkichuwa Municipality -1

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 77

KII WITH LOCAL ELECTED BODIES

Date Activities Name Position Place Watershed Sex Ethnicity

Mahakali River Basin F M Total Dalit Janajati BCTS

23-Nov- KII Juna Jagri Deputy Mayor Jay Prithvi West Seti 18 Municipality, Bajhang 1 1 1

23-Nov- KII Geeta Devi Kami Dalit elected Jay Prithvi West Seti 18 Member Municipality, Bajhang 1 1 1

26-Nov- KII Bal Bahadur Chair Person Alital Rural Rangun 1 1 1 18 Gurung Municipality, Dadeldhura

26-Nov- KII Jala Bogati Vice Chair Alital Rural Rangun 1 1 1 18 Person Municipality, Dadeldhura

Karnali River Basin

29-Nov- KII Parbati Bishunke Dalit Member Narayan Middle Karnali 1 1 1 18 of Parliament Municipality, Dailekh

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 78

KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW (KII) WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDER

Date Office Name Position Place Watershed Sex Ethnicity

Mahakali River Basin F M Total Dalit Janajati BCTS

23-Nov-18 District Forest office Krishna Raj Forest Division Jayprithvi West Seti Neupane Officer Municipality, Bajhang 1 1

23-Nov-18 Kantipur Daily Basanta Pratap Journalist Jayprithvi West Seti Singh Municipality, Bajhang 1 1

23-Nov-18 Jay Prithvi Tita Magar Supervisor Jayprithvi West Seti Municipality, Municipality, Women and child Bajhang department 1 1

Karnali River Basin

29-Nov-18 Women Human Radika Malla Member Gumgadi, Rara 1 1 Rights Defender Mugu Network

29-Nov-18 FECOFUN Padma Yogi District Dailekh Middle 1 1 Coordinator Karnali

USAID.GOV GESI ANALYSIS OF USAID PAANI PROGRAM | 79