Who Benefits? Decentralised Forest Governance through Community Forestry in Nepal By Biddya Sigdel Baral, Masters Degree in Mathematics, Masters Degree in Social Science Submitted in total fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April, 2014 Program in Politics and International Relations School of Social Science University of Tasmania Australia DECLARATION This thesis contains no material that has been accepted for degree or diploma by the University or any other institution, except by way of background information and duly acknowledged in the thesis, and to the best of the candidate’s knowledge and belief no material previously published or written by another person except where due acknowledgement is made in the text of the thesis, nor does the thesis contain any material that infringes copyright. .................................. Biddya Sigdel Baral University of Tasmania 28 April 2014 i STATEMENT ON AUTHORITY OF ACCESS This thesis may be made available for loan and copying in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968. ................................... Biddya Sigdel Baral 28 April, 2014 University of Tasmania Newnham Campus, Launceston, TAS 7250 Australia ii ABSTRACT Old fashioned, centralised and bureaucratic systems of natural resources management have been blamed for the failure to conserve forest resources. Such arrangements are alleged to result in top-down decision making processes, low levels of community participation, and lack of transparency. These criticisms have led to claims that the devolution of forest management to the community will improve resource management and more effectively deliver sustainable development. The devolution from the state to local communities of natural resource management access rights has been an important policy tool for forest management over the last several decades. This research examines to what extent, and how, decentralized forest governance delivers enhanced economic, social and environmental benefits. More specifically this study develops and tests a framework to assess how devolved forest governance performs across the indicators of participation, transparency, accountability, effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. A set of policy relevant and locally applicable governance indicators was developed through a participatory process that involved a large number of stakeholders including CFUG members and policy makers. To explore this topic, the study combines a single case study of devolved forest governance in Nepal with a medium-n research design of perceptions of community forestry operations in nine community forest user groups from three districts representing three different Nepalese ecological zones. A purposive sampling method was used to select CFUGs with different characteristics and CFUG members' opinions were collected using both qualitative and quantitative approaches. The study reveals that the key elements and indicators of governance are dialectically interconnected. Governance performance on one element and associated indicators shapes the iii outcome of other elements and indicators. Community forests located in the Middle Hills and High Mountains regions of Nepal generally perform well across the various governance indicators used, while a lower level of performance was observed in Terai region. However the research finds that ecological zone is not a determining factor of good governance; instead, socio-economic factors are found to shape the success of community forestry governance and outcomes. In addition, the research reveals that external agencies actually enhance community forest governance and outcomes as a result of synergy, interaction and cross-fertilization of knowledge between community forestry participants, government officials and other stakeholders. It is also the case that the better a community forest is governed, the more it flourishes and the wealthier it becomes. However, the distribution of the wealth and capital generated by a community forest remains a concern as the benefits are not being shared with the wider community. The research highlights the need to build the capacity of community forest users and, especially, to empower poor and disadvantaged people to ensure they obtain access to and are able to utilise the available resources. By developing an innovative framework to assess governance at local level, this study not only informs us about decentralised community forestry in Nepal, but the framework can also be utilised to assess community-based natural resource management initiatives in other developing countries. Keywords: Decentralisation, good governance, community forestry, community forest user groups, participation, transparency, accountability, Nepal iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my profound gratitude to my principal supervisor Associate Professor Fred Gale for his insights and substantial comments for shaping this work to completion. I am indebted to him for the generous allocation of time to read my numerous drafts and constant encouragement while juggling with family pressure and study. I would like to thank my co-supervisor Dr Joanna Vince for her support. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Dr Matthew Sussex for his generous support during this study. My sincere thanks go to academic and administrative staffs of Melbourne School of Land and Environment, University of Melbourne who hosted me as a visiting fellow during my PhD candidature particularly, Prof Rodney J Keenan and Dr Sabine Kasel. I also thank to Dr Maheshore Dhakal who acted a local contact person in Nepal during my fieldwork. Thanks are also due to: • I would also like to extend my gratitude to everyone who agreed to be interviewed as part of this study and who gave so generously of their time particularly members of nine community forest user groups, • My special thanks go to Kiran Paudyal, Sindhu P Dhungana and Uddhav Sigdel for their help in sharing ideas and collecting data in Nepal. Several others who provided generous assistance during field work in Nepal Nirmala Sharma, Dipak Gyanwali, Ajeet Karna, Rabindra Maharjan, Ajaya Manandhar, Indra P Sapkota, Ramkrishna KC, Shanta Ram Baral, Kalpana Gyanwali, Abimanyu KC, Radha Wagle, Navaraj Dahal, Durga D Regmi, Juna Budhathoki, Sita KC, • Staffs of District Forest Offices in Dolakha, Lalitpur and Rupandehi District for supplying various data and copies of CFUG operational plan and constitutions, • All academic and administrative staff in the UTAS particularly Cradle Coast Campus, Burnie and Newhams Campus, Launceston for their support, • My friends and colleagues studying in Australia and overseas for providing comments and sharing their knowledge and experience, • To all those I have otherwise neglected to acknowledge, I offer my apologies and appreciation. Above all, I am really indebted to my dearest husband Himlal, son Avinab and daughter Alaka for patiently sharing all my pressure during the course of study. I am also deeply thankful to my family in Nepal and in abroad for their love, care and moral support for pursuing higher study particularly my mum Radhadevi who visited Tasmania and always encouraged to complete the thesis on time. Similarly, I would like to thank to my brothers Uddhav and Kishor and sisters Indira, Sudevi and Laxmi who always encouraged during my PhD journey and family balance. Finally, I fondly tribute to my late father who inspired me to do my best in academic and social journey! v TABLE OF CONTENTS Declaration................................................................................................................................. i Statement on Authority of Access .......................................................................................... ii Abstract ................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... v List of Table ........................................................................................................................... xiv List of Figures ........................................................................................................................ xvi List of Acronyms .................................................................................................................... xx Glossary of Nepali terms ................................................................................................... xxiii Chapter 1: Introduction and Objectives ................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Community-based forestry ............................................................................................... 2 1.3 Decentralisation and forest governance ........................................................................... 3 1.4 Research rationale ............................................................................................................ 4 1.5 Research questions ........................................................................................................... 7 1.6 Argument .......................................................................................................................... 8 1.7 Research design and methods .......................................................................................