Landscape Approach to Biodiversity Conservation in Nepal

Ek Raj Sigdel
February, 2007

Abstract
Nepal has put utmost efforts to conserve her rich biodiversity resources. The conservation history begins formally after promulgation of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act in 1973. National Parks and Wildlife Reserves were established across the country during the 70s. By realizing the need of people participation in the conservation initiatives, the country has tested the concept of different types of protected areas such as conservation areas, buffer zone and landscape approach to conservation over the years. Landscape approach to biodiversity conservation has been adopted since 2000s. In this front, among others, Western Terai Landscape Complex Project has been implemented in the Far Western Development Region of the country since August 2005. Within a short span of time the project with an integrated conservation and development activities, has been able to change people's attitude towards biodiversity conservation and simultaneously the conservation value of biodiversity resources has been enhanced. In addition some lesson has been learned, which could be useful for national and international stakeholders.


Biodiversity value of the country
Because of altitudinal and climatic variances in short geographic distance, Nepal is endowed with rich biodiversity resources. The country comprises only 0.1% of the worlds land masses, but it harbors high share of biodiversity. A total of 118 ecosystems have been identified in Nepal, with 75 vegetation types and 35 forest types (HMGN/MFSC, 2002). Species richness among floral diversity comprises lichens 465 species (2.3 % of the global diversity), bryophytes 853 species (5.1%), and angiosperms 5,856 species (2.7%). Likewise, faunal diversity includes butterflies 640 species and moths 2,253 species (together 2.6%), birds 852 species (9.3%) and mammals 181 species (4.5%) (GoN/MFSC, 2006). The country has established an impressive network of protected areas (national parks, wildlife reserve, hunting reserve, conservation area, and buffer zone) to safeguard her rich biodiversity resources. Over 19% of the land masses of the country are occupied by the protected area network, including 3.45% buffer zone.

Conservation initiatives
Nepal's conservation history can be tracked back from 1950. Conservation initiatives have been taken through establishing a Rhino Sanctuary in Chitwan in 1956. The main objective of the Sanctuary was to protect the one horned rhinoceros. The conservation efforts took momentum when the country established extensive protected area system during 1970s. National Parks and Wildlife Reserves were established during this decade. The objective of the protected areas was to protect wildlife species, including endangered rhinoceros, tigers, and wild elephants.

During 80s, people-centered approach in protected area management was evolved. Himalayan National Park Regulation promulgated in 1979 has made the provision of incorporating local peoples' needs into national park's management goals. The regulation allows access to fuel-wood, fodder and litter of protected areas to local communities. Similarly, annual thatch grass harvesting provisions in all lowland National Park and Wildlife Reserves was introduced to response traditional resource use right of local people. During this period, the government also added conservation areas in protected area network, which seeks higher people participation in conservation. The Annapurna Conservation Area emphasizes people's participation in resource management and utilization, and provides high priority to development, was initiated in this period (Sharma 1995).

During 90s, the government introduced the policy of sharing part of the protected areas revenue with adjoining communities by establishing buffer zones. With this, the traditional species conservation approach has shifted towards ecosystem based approach of biodiversity conservation. The concept of buffer zone in and around protected areas was introduced in 1993 following the realization that sustainable wildlife conservation is possible only by active participation of local people (Maskey 2001). Fourth amendment was made on National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973 and introduced the regulation of sharing up to 50% annual income of protected areas with buffer zone communities. The government envisioned conservation areas and buffer zone management regime aims at achieving effective management of National Parks and reserves, while at the same time giving due regard to the local communities (Sharma 2001).

Nepal has been embarking towards landscape approach to conservation in the new millennium. The landscape approach to conservation includes the integration of conservation and sustainable use concept in various interwoven land use systems across human and biodiversity landscape. It advocates for conservation of biodiversity resources beyond protected areas and people are considered as an integral component of an ecosystem.

In summary, the conservation paradigm has shifted from top down approach to bottom up planning. Initial management approach of command and control through mobilizing armed force has been replaced gradually by community based anti poaching operations. Similarly, the early emphasize was placed on species conservation followed by ecosystem and landscape approach to biodiversity conservation. Moreover, the role of government has been shifted from implementer to facilitator, monitor and regulator.

Conservation commitments
Nepal's commitment towards biodiversity conservation can be exemplified by being signatory of various international conventions, establishment of well functional institutional framework at national level, promulgation of innovative legal and policy agenda and implementation of different types of programs in and around protected area system.

At the international arena, Nepal affirmed its commitment to conserve biodiversity resources by ratifying the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1994. It is also a signatory of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). As per the commitment, with the support of UNDP-GEF, the country has prepared Nepal Biodiversity Strategy and Nepal Biodiversity Strategy Implementation Plan. Likewise, four wetlands are enlisted in Ramsar Sites. Similarly, a CITES unit has been established in the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation.
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973, Buffer Zone Regulation 1993, Himalayan Park Regulation 1979, Annapurna Conservation Regulation 1993 are the major legal framework for conserving biodiversity resources of the country. Similarly, Self Governance Act 1995 empowers local authority to manage natural resources at local level. Likewise, Forest Act 1993 encourages development of various types of forest management models, including community forest, collaborative forest, religious forest, private forest and national forest.

Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation discharges the conservation activities through Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation office. Department of Forest under the Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation also involves conserving biodiversity resources mainly outside of the protected area network. Ministry of Agricultural Development has also stake in biodiversity conservation.

Landscape approach conservation initiatives
Nepal has to adopt landscape approach to biodiversity conservation for various reasons (Bennett, 2001). Firstly, Nepal has a number of protected areas of outstanding value for the protection of biodiversity at a global scale. Like, many other countries, however, these areas are likely to be inadequate on their own to ensure the long-term conservation of the flora and fauna that occurs within the country. The protected areas system does not fully represent all components of biodiversity, and many known areas of importance for the flora and fauna lie outside the reserve system. Secondly, individual protected areas are often inadequate to meet the ecological requirements of a number of species, particularly large sized animal species.

Thirdly, substantial areas of forest are still present outside the protected areas. Thus there is an existing basis (in terms of natural resources) for landscape level approach that seeks to maintain biodiversity within the productive landscape. Finally, most communities of people in Nepal have a close dependence on the land and its natural resources for their survival. Consequently, an approach that seeks to extend conservation beyond the reserve system must recognize the place of human communities, and their aspirations and impacts on the land. Landscape ecology is a discipline that explicitly recognizes the place of people in the environment (Bennett, 2001. It seeks to develop solutions for land use that take into account human impacts.

Policy framework for landscape level conservation
National Biodiversity Strategy 2002 and Nepal Biodiversity Implementation Plan 2006 reflect a shift in Nepal's biodiversity conservation management paradigm towards a more holistic, ecosystem – oriented approach to conservation and sustainable use. The Tenth Five Year Plan (2003 – 2008) incorporates landscape approach to conservation and sustainable use as a new strategic and operational direction. Similarly, the government if Nepal, with the support of WWF Nepal has prepared Terai Arc Landscape Strategy (2004 – 2014) and Terai Arc Landscape Implementation Plan in 2006.

Programs
In line with conserving biodiversity resources at Landscape level, the government with the support of various donor communities, including UNDP, GEF, WWF, and SNV has implemented various programs across the country.

With the objective of promoting conservation and sustainable use of natural resources outside of the protected areas and getting support from UNDP, the government of Nepal successfully implemented buffer zone programme in seven protected areas of the country between 1995 and 2006. Community participation, gender integration, poverty reduction, benefits to disadvantaged groups was all important component of this conservation package. The buffer zone management initiatives have enhanced the capacity of both the Department of National parks and Wildlife Conservation and the local people to manage the protected area system and improve socio-economic conditions of the people living in adjoining areas.

The notable impacts following the declaration of buffer zones and implementation of conservation and development are the improvement in park-people relationships with growing participation of local people in buffer zone development programmes and the institutionalization of community based organizations such as buffer zone management committees, user committees, user groups and buffer zone forest user groups. Community mobilization adopted by the programme has proven to be the best means to conserve natural resources and biodiversity in the long-run. Based on the experience of this project, conservation succeeds only when people are brought to the forefront of natural resource management and empowered adequately. Mainstreaming women, special target groups and the poor in conservation and development is must for successful implementation of buffer zone programs (DNPWC 2006).

To facilitate the migration of globally endangered wildlife species, like rhinoceros and tiger beyond buffer zone of Chitwan National Park, a world heritage site in Nepal, National Conservation Trust, a national NGO successfully implemented landscape-scale conservation of endangered tiger and rhinoceros populations in and around Chitwan National Park. Similarly, to facilitate movement of the umbrella species, including tiger, rhinoceros and wild elephants, WWF Nepal has implemented Terai Arc Landscape project in 14 districts of Nepal. Likewise, to safeguard the globally endangered wildlife species of Western Terai, the government of Nepal in partnership with UNDP, GEF, SNV, WWF, Bioversity International, Nepal Agriculture Research Council and LIBIRD has implemented WTLCP in Bardia, Kailali and Kanchanpur districts of Nepal.


Western Terai Landscape Complex Project
The Western Terai Landscape Complex (WTLC) focuses on conserving the rich biological diversity of the western region of Nepal. This area has been included in the list of WWF's Global 200 Ecoregion. WTLCP occupies a land area of approximately 7,200 sq km and stretches from Brdia National Park (BNP) in the east to Suklaphanta Wildlife Reserve (SWR) in the western edge of Nepal. BNP and SWR lie within 100km distance from each other. Due to the large-scale clearance of forests for agricultural development in the last three decades, SWR and BNP are no longer connected through a contiguous tract of lowland forests.

The WTLC is globally significant with regard to both its faunal and floral diversity. It is home to threatened wildlife species, including tigers (Panthera tigris), rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis), wild elephants (Elephas maximus), swamp deer (Cervus Duvauceli), black buck (Antilope cervicarpa). The tigers and elephants are categorized as flagship species for this landscape.

Despite the outstanding value of BNP and SWR for the protection of globally significant biodiversity, they are likely to be inadequate on their own to ensure the long term conservation of flora and fauna that occurs in this region. The main reasons are: 1) these protected areas do not fully represent all component of biodiversity in the area and many known areas of importance for flora and fauna lie outside the protected area system; 2)These individual protected areas are inadequate in meeting the ecological requirements of a number of species, in particular the large mammals,, such as tigers, rhinoceros, and elephants which have large area requirements; 3) based on scientific evidence, isolation of these protected areas from other habitats is likely to lead to progressive loss of species over the long run. To address the above mentioned issues, landscape approach to biodiversity conservation was felt necessary in the western region. The region is characterized high human and income poverty, low human and income poverty, low human development, deep gender disparity, and low gender empowerment.

Conservation challenges
The biodiversity rich forests in this landscape have become increasingly degraded and fragmented as a result of ever increasing population and their growing dependency on forest resources. The immediate cause of deforestation and degradation is dependency of local communities on forest resources for timber, firewood, non timber forest products and agricultural land. Forest degradation and fragmentation in turn have contributed to the loss of habitat connectivity for the flagship species. Habitat fragmentation has the effect of reducing previously extensive mammal populations into genetically isolated sub-populations, many of which now risk falling below the threshold of population viability.


WTLCP Objective
The project is designed to conserve and ensure the sustainable use of globally significant biodiversity in the Western Terai Landscape Complex. The immediate objective is to conserve and ensure sustainable use of biodiversity resources across multiple land uses in WTLC through a landscape approach linked with community based management. The project emphasizes with multisectoral and multi stakeholder partnership to conservation. It advocates for strengthening community based biodiversity conservation by integrating biodiversity criteria with management plan of productive landscape. Similarly, with this programmes the protected area personnel will learn more participatory conservation.

Implementation approaches
Local communities are considered as the principle actor of the landscape level conservation. Hence their participation in project planning, monitoring, evaluation and benefit sharing process has been solicited from the very beginning of the project implementation process. To safeguard community inspiration and fulfill their demand, fullest attempt has been made to coordinate stakeholders ranging from civil society to government line agencies to local authority.

Management strategy
To address the wide ranges of issues, the Government of Nepal through WTLCP has implemented integrated conservation and development activities in the Western Region of Nepal. The conservation programs includes community based forest management, wildlife species and their habitat conservation, maintenance of habitat connectivity through promoting community forestry, private forestry, collaborative forestry, home garden, road side plantation, forests regeneration, and river side plantation. Likewise community based development activities includes micro-infrastructure development, alternative livelihoods, formation and strengthening of community based organizations and establishment of its linkage with government line agencies and other key stakeholders; promotion of alternative energy resources, institutionalization of participatory planning and monitoring system and implementation of various environment awareness activities.

Achievements
It has been observed that with the concerted efforts, within a short span of time, some of biodiversity resources outside of the protected area are being maintained and have become a safe haven for wildlife species. Barandabhar in Chitwan and Basanta and Laljhadi forests in western terai has become new home for rhinoceros, tigers and wild elephants respectively. Similarly, implementation of income generating activities, like Non Timber Forest Product management, ecotourism, off season vegetable farming program etc. local communities’ support for biodiversity conservation has been on raise.

Due to community based income generation activities, the attitude of local communities towards landscape approach to conservation ahs been changed gradually over the years. As project is working in multiple land use system, the coordination amongst the wider stakeholders is necessary. In this connection district forest coordination committee, which represents local authority, civil society, local non government organizations, and political parties has been formed and strengthened. The project has implemented its activities through government line agencies, local authority, community based organizations and non government organizations, which has helped to capacitate stakeholders towards landscape approach to biodiversity conservation.

Lesson learned / best practices
Project has given high priority to those activities which supports conservation and development work simultaneously. In this regard, micro infrastructure like irrigation pump, drinkable water, road gravelling etc are being supported to local communities. These activities are found very effective for raising local income through farming cash crops in the agricultural lands and making easy access to market. In the mean time through irrigation, local communities are establishing various nurseries, which help to maintain greenery in community and private land.

To sustain the project on financial, institutional, social and physical grounds, the project has undertaken various activities. For instance, project has supported local communities, mainly poor, women and disadvantageous group with seed money for income generation through cooperative scheme. A revolving fund mechanism has been envisioned. The mechanism has been considered as an important strategy to sustain the project activities in a long run.

To sustain the project activities on social ground, attempt has been made to include all the sectors of society, including local communities, poor, and women on project planning and implementation stages. In addition, they are organized into various user groups, user committees and coordination committees. The project has ventilated its objectives and implementation strategies to wider stakeholders through organizing various formal and informal meetings. Within a short span of time, the project has been able to attract heart and mind of local communities. The basic physical facilities supported by project to local communities and government line agencies include, community buildings, maintenance of guard posts, communication and transportation facilities, among others.

In order to bring the benefit down to the poorest of the poor community, the project has adopted positive discrimination approach. Local communities are categorized into various income groups, like rich, middle, poor and very poor through well being ranking exercises. Then, the very poor communities are provided with entrepreneurship development training. Based on their interest to undertake micro enterprises development activities, the project provides seed money to these trainees through cooperatives scheme. The approach has been performing well and stakeholders are appreciating the strategy wholeheartedly.

Local communities, especially outsiders of the protected areas are being convinced on the higher biodiversity value of community forest. The traditional approach of managing forest for timber and firewood has been changed gradually towards managing forest for biodiversity resources. In this regard, local communities are being interacted about the biodiversity consideration criteria in community forests. Some of the criteria have already been worked out. It is hoped that the community forest user groups as well as district forest office will gradually integrate biodiversity criteria in their management and operational plan in the days to come.

Maintenance of transparency on project objective and allocated budget for various activities is most important. In this regards, service providers are encouraged to institutionalize public auditing system. The strategy is working well.

While consulting local communities and other stakeholders, they always put conservation awareness activities in their priority list for making conservation work more effective and efficient. To make conservation work more effective, the project has been mobilizing school teacher and students by forming eco-club and eco-network. Interaction amongst eco-club members and eco-network has been continued. In addition, these organizations are provided with the opportunity of exposure tour, clean up campaign, quiz contest among others.

The project has implemented various trainings to capacitate local communities to undertake various income generation and conservation activities on their own. To make the training more productive, the project has adopted a practice of follow up and review, where service providers, project staff members, trainee and resource person sit together and review the effectiveness of training. Based on the feed back of the follow up meetings, the project revises its training programs accordingly.

Conclusion
To safeguard the country's rich biodiversity resources, Nepal has taken various measures. The protected area management policy and practice has been heading towards more of progressive and participatory management system. Local people are placed in the center of the protected area management system. In this front, various programs, like conservation area, buffer zone and landscape level conservation have been implemented. With the support of various national and international partner organizations, the government of Nepal has implemented WTLCP for two years in the western region of the country, which includes a package of integrated conservation and development activities. Within a short span of time the project has been able to change people's attitude towards biodiversity conservation, even outside of the protected area system. The quality of wildlife habitat at landscape level is getting improved on the one hand and on the other the livelihood options for local communities are diversified.






References
Bennett, A. F. (2001) Nepal Biodiversity Landscape Project. A report to UNDP Nepal and HMG Nepal.

DNPWC / Government of Nepal, (2006) Forging Partnership in Promoting Sustainable Livelihoods. Reflections on Achievements in Participatory Conservation (1995 – 2006)

GoN/MFSC, (2006) Nepal Biodiversity Strategy Implementation Plan. Government of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Singhdurbar, Kathmandu.

HMGN/MFSC, (2002) National Biodiversity Strategy. His Majesty's Government of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation.

Maskey, T.M. (2001) Biodiversity Conservation in Nepal with reference to protected areas. Protected Area Management in South Asia. Proceedings of WCPA South Asia Regional Workshop on Protected Area Management, Kathmandu, Nepal, pp. 114 – 127.

Sharma, U.R. (1995) Wildlife Conservation Policies and Strategies in protected areas of Nepal. Highlight of the Inaugural Ceremony and the Proceeding of the International Workshop on Sustainable Development and Conservation: The Role of Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation, KMTNC, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Sharma, U.R. (2001) Conservation and development should go hand in hand. Park People Bulletin Vol 5, 1-5.