Environment and Climate Change Issues Mainstreamed into Local Development Plans

Ek Raj Sigdel*, Meeta Acharya** & Pushpa Koirala***

*Local Environment Specialist, Local Governance and Community Development Program

**Environment Expert, Environment Friendly Local Governance Program

***Environment Expert, Local Climate Change Adaptive Living Facility

Environment Friendly Local Governance Programme (EFLGP) has executed by the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD), Nepal in 14 Districts, 54 Municipalities and 60 Village Development Committees (VDCs) since December 2014. Objective of the intervention was to mainstream environment into local bodies' annual development plan and budgets. Though a preliminary study was carried out under PEI in 2013, no follow up study was undertaken since then. This study was carried out based on reviewing annual development plans of selected local bodies in June 2016. It was found that the proportion of annual budget figure for environment friendly local development activities has increased noticeably over the years. Further, in an average 15.03% of the total local bodies’ budget were relevant to the pro-poor environment, climate change and disaster related activities. Moreover, 80 % of EFLGP implementing municipalities have adopted policy of promoting environment friendly local governance in their annual development plans. From the findings of present study it can be inferred that Environment Friendly Local Governance Programme intervention in programme implementing local bodies has positively catalyzed to increase budget allocation on environment related activities in their Annual Development Plans. This also implies that local bodies are giving due consideration in addressing and adapting to climate change and disaster management to some extent. Also there is a significant difference in proportion of budget allocation in non EFLGP implementing local bodies and EFLGP implementing local bodies. The encouraging results was due to the massive scale of sensitization, infrastructure support and awareness programmes before planning period at central level and local level for various stakeholders involved in planning and budgeting process. However the effective implementation of the allocated budget and programmes by local bodies remain the subject of further study and analysis.

Background

Environment Friendly Local Governance Programme (EFLGP) has executed by the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD) in 14 Districts, 54 Municipalities and 60 Village Development Committees (VDCs) since December 2014 (Annex 1). The objective of EFLGP was to enhance adaptive capacity of climate change vulnerable community groups including women and marginalized people to cope with impacts of climate change through adopting integrated environment, climate and disaster resilient planning and budgeting approach. One of the specific objectives of the EFLGP was to integrate environment, climate change and disaster risk reduction issues into local development planning and budgeting process and to bestow ownership of the programme to local government for its sustainability. Moreover, the programme has supported local government to make them able to adopt EFLG through approving it as an important program of the respective district and municipalities.

After intervention of EFLGP from 2014, it was felt necessary to know the programme effect in EFLG programme intervention areas. With this objective, annual development plans of all EFLGP implemented DDC and Municipalities were reviewed. Moreover, to know to what extent the program was effective against its stated objective, similar kind of studies were reviewed. The study was carried out in 2016 immediately after the local bodies completed their respective annual council meetings and approved activities for fiscal year 2016/2017.

Literature Review

Local Self Governance Act (LSGA), 1999 and Regulation, 2000 authorize local bodies to manage natural resources of their respective areas. Similarly, Local Bodies Resource Mobilization & Management Guideline, 2069 states that under ‘Capital budget’ VDC as per Section 28 of LSGA, 1999;  Municipality as per Section 96 of LSGA, 1999 & DDC as per Section 189 of LSGA, 1999 need to formulate plan and programmes in forest management, environment conservation, bio diversity conservation, park & open space maintenance, establishment of greenery areas, climate change adaptation and mitigation, renewable energy promotion, waste management, natural disaster and disaster risk reduction, among others.

A study on to what extent local government has considered poverty and environment in their annual development plans was carried out in selected 15 District Development Committee (DDCs) and 5 municipalities of Nepal under Poverty Environment Initiative (PEI), - a joint undertaking of UNDP, UNEP and MoFALD, in 2013 in Nepal (Unpublished Report of MoFALD, 2013). The study revealed that only 4% of the total annual development budget was set aside for environment friendly development activities by local bodies.

Similarly, the total budget figure for environment activities such as environment conservation and climate change adaptation (IEE, Local adaptation and improved cooking stoves) was NRs. 43,25,000 (USD 40168.31) that is 4% of the total in FY 2012/13 (Dhading DDC Plan, 2069/90). Likewise Rupandehi District had allocated around 10% of its total budget for environment and climate change activities under separate headings of annual development plan 2015/2016. Both Rupandehi and Dhaing districts are being supported with capacity development by Poverty Environment Initiative (PEI) and Local Climate Change Adaptive Living Facility (LoCAL) so as to make them able to incorporate environment and poverty linked policies and programs into their development plans.

EFLGP Operational Guideline states that local body should prepare project funding matrix for EFLGP following Local Climate Change Adaptation Plan (LAPA) framework. Moreover, the EFLGP have to follow government's 14 step planning process. As against the stated objectives, the EFLGP has implemented various sustainable environment and climate resilient activities in the programme sites. Further, various capacity development training and awareness programs has been implemented so as to create demand for environment friendly local development activities from local climate vulnerable communities. Whether the interventions were effective or not, a study was felt necessary. In this context, this study was intended to know whether local bodies have adopted EFLG through their council meeting and to know the proportion of environment related activities and budget included in their Annual Development Plans.

Rationale of the study

In 2014, MoFALD implemented EFLGP in the aforementioned selected local bodies with the objective of mainstreaming environment into local bodies' annual development plan and budgets. Therefore, it was high time to know to what extent the local bodies have considered environment as an integral part of their development activities through reviewing their Annual Development Plans. Also it was felt necessary to know the programme implications in EFLG programme areas in regards to sustainability and ownership of the programme. With this objective, the study was carried out in 2016 immediately after when the local bodies completed their respective annual council meetings and approved activities for fiscal year 2015/16.

Though a preliminary study was carried out under PEI in 2013, no follow up study was undertaken since then. It was essential to know to what extent the local bodies are aware towards considering environment as a part and parcel of the development agenda. Moreover there was no study on how many local bodies have adopted EFLG in their council. Therefore, with this rationale, this study was carried out in June 2016.

Methodology

The study was carried out based on review of secondary data in consultation with district and municipality stakeholders, including Executive Officer, Monitoring and Evaluation Officers (M & E) of EFLGP and Energy Officer of EFLGP implementing local bodies. The M & E officers were provided the template regarding council meeting decision status of their respective local bodies and asked them to complete the form by reviewing the approved Annual Development Plan 2015/16 of their respected District Development Committee and Municipalities. Based on reviewing and analyzing the Annual Development Plans of all EFLGP implemented 14 districts and 54 municipalities, results were drawn. The indicators for mainstreaming were assessed based on the budgets allocated by local bodies in their annual development plans. Moreover, it was also assessed to know how many EFLGP implemented local bodies have adopted EFLG in their policies. Also for comparative analysis, a study undertaken under PEI in 2013 was reviewed and data was analyzed for drawing conclusion. Since the study was solely dependent on secondary information provided by M & E officers and field interactions, some of the data are incomplete due to lack of publication of Annual Development Plan of some local bodies.

Findings:

Based on analysis of the available data it was found that all EFLGP implemented local bodies have organized their respective council meetings in the stipulated time framework and have adopted EFLGP by their Council Meetings. Except for Garuda municipality of Rautahat district, all 53 municipalities have approved/endorsed EFLG programs for FY 2015/16. While reviewing Annual Development plans of all EFLGP implemented local bodes, it was revealed that in an average 15.03% of the total local bodies’ budget were relevant to the pro-poor environment, climate change and disaster related activities.

In an average, a DDC (EFLGP implemented) has approved a total of Rs. 1,92,97,00,470 (USD 17940695.43) for the fiscal year 2015/16.

The maximum around 34 % of annual total development budget by Nawalparasi DDC and the least budget around 0.54 % was allocated by Saptari DDC for environment friendly development activities. All 11 DDCs have adopted EFLGP in their annual development plans of 2016/17. The database for Rautahat DDC was not available during the time of data analysis. In case of Municipalities, Beltar Basaha & Chandrapur allocated maximum 40 % of the total annual budget in environment and climate change related activities and Dhulikhel municipality has allocated the least amount i.e 0. 53 %. In an average, each municipality has endorsed the total annual budget of NRs. 87179289 (USD 810518.05) for FY 2016/17. Out of the total 54 municipalities studied, 79.6% has adopted EFLG in their Annual Development Plan of fiscal year 2016/17. Another 18.5% municipalities did not adopt EFLGP in their annual development plan. The other 1.8% municipalities, the data was not available.  Major Environment related programmes in the Annual Development Plans of EFLGP implementing LBs were as follows table 1.

Table 1: local bodies that have included environment related activities in their respective annual development plans of 2016/17

Major Programs	Activities	Number of LBs	Percentage of local bodies
Water Source Conservation	Lake maintenance, pond maintenance and rehabilitation construction, well maintenance and conservation, drinking water source conservation, drinking water supply and water pumping system management	55	86
Plantation	Afforestation, road side plantation, nursery management, public land conservation and protection	50	78
Renewable Energy	Solar charged vehicles, solar light at CAC, solar street lamp, solar tuki, ICS promotion, installation and training, biogas installation and Bio Briquette	42	66
Park Construction and Maintenance	Park construction and maintenance, botanical garden, children and greenery park, memorial park, picnic spot	38	59
Environment Awareness Programs	Climate change, child and women focused environment awareness, cleanup campaign, awareness on EFLG, world environment day celebration, environment friendly building, environment friendly home, environment friendly school, excursion for observation of solid waste management, orientation behavioral change	36	56
Waste Management	Compost plant installation, feasibility study for landfill site, landfill site construction, training, environment friendly bag promotion and production	29	45
Health and sanitation	Bus terminal management (public toilet and sanitation), public toilet construction, toilet support program, ODF related programs	27	42
River Bank Protection	Bio-engineering, dam construction, drainage management, embankment construction, river bank management and river training program,	25	39
Disaster Risk Management	Disaster risk management and disaster management fund	10	16
Tourism Development	Tourism, ecotourism, home stay tourism planning and promotion,	6	9
Cattle shed Management	Cattle shed improvement	6	9
Agriculture Production	Irrigation, production collection center, IPM programme, organic farming, roof top vegetable farming, awareness program	6	9
Landslide Control	Landslide protection program	2	3
Climate Change	Climate change adaptation and mitigation program	2	3
Total		334

Source: Review of Annual Development Plans of Local Bodies of FY 2016/17Source: Review of Annual Development Plans of Local Bodies of FY 2016/17

Discussions:

From the available data, it is found that the proportion of annual budget figure for environment friendly local development activities has increased noticeably over the years. This might be due to increased awareness of concerned stakeholders and local bodies in poverty environment link issues and impact of Environment Friendly Local Governance Programme.

Also, it was found that proportion of budget allocation in EFLGP implementing local bodies is significantly higher in comparison to local bodies without the EFLGP intervention areas. This could be due to the raised sensitization on environmental awareness and capacity development through massive programme orientations, program support and workshops at central and field level. Also it implies that EFLGP is successful in mainstreaming pro-poor environment, climate change and disaster issues into local bodies annual development plans which indicates that programme.

Moreover, 80 % of EFLGP implementing municipalities have adopted policy of promoting environment friendly local governance in their annual development plans. Also analysis of proportion of different environment related programmes in Annual Development Plans revealed that 86% of EFLGP implementing local bodies allocated programme on’ Water conservation’ followed by plantation by 78% of local bodies. However only 3% of local bodies allocated programmes for Climate Change and Disaster Management Activities. This might be despite the raised awareness on environmental issues, local bodies still lack adequate sensitization on importance of considering climate change and disaster management issues as an integral part of development. However, the other programmes like water source conservation, plantation, renewable energy, park construction, public land conservation and management also directly and indirectly contribute to climate change adaptation, mitigation and disaster management which are given priority in most of the local bodies.

Also increased proportion of budget and programme on environment, climate change and disaster management sectors might be due to massive orientation campaigning at central and local level before the programme planning period in comparison to other local bodies without programme interventions. Also there have been different ministry level directives to local bodies (Greenery Promotion, Renewable Energy/ Solar) from time to time that have also guided the local bodies in giving priority to environment, climate change and disaster management issues in their annual plans. It implies that EFLGP is well owned by local bodies and therefore it demands upscaling all across the country.

Through PEI support in Dhading District, stakeholders including political parties, local bodies, government line agencies and civil society organizations were sensitized for prioritizing environment and climate change issues into their annual development plans to address poverty issues through organizing workshop just before annual plan preparation. Accordingly, the total budget figure for environment activities such as environment conservation and climate change and adaptation (IEE, Local adaptation and improved cooking stoves) was reached to NRs. 43, 25,000 (USD 40168.31) (4%) in FY 2012/13 from NRs. 43, 00,000 (USD 39936.12 )(3.6%) in FY 2068/69 in Dhading (DDC Dhading, Annual District Development Plan 2067 & 2068). With PEI and LoCAL support on raising awareness of district development committees on importance of mainstreaming environment, climate change into local development plans, Rupandehi has allocated around 10% of its total budget for pro-poor environment and climate change activities under separate headings of annual development plan 201/16. While Kapilvastu a neighboring district of Rupandehi where intensive support has not extended for capacity development to incorporate environment and climate change issues into their annual development plans, has allocated less than 2% budgets for environment friendly pro-poor development activities in 2015/16.

Conclusion

From the findings of present study it can be inferred that Environment Friendly Local Governance Programme intervention in programme implementing local bodies has positively catalyzed to increase budget allocation on environment related activities in their Annual Development Plans. This also implies that local bodies are giving due consideration in addressing and adapting to climate change and disaster management to some extent. Also there is a significant difference in proportion of budget allocation in non EFLGP implementing local bodies and EFLGP implementing local bodies. This is due to the massive scale of sensitization, infrastructure support and awareness programmes before planning period at central level and local level for various stakeholders involved in planning and budgeting process. However the effective implementation of the allocated budget and programmes by local bodies remain the subject of further study and analysis.

Road Ahead

For effective environment related programme implementation, there should be regular monitoring and follow. Also the performance of the local bodies should be evaluated by the implementation status in specific sector not merely from the allocation of budget. In addition, necessary guidelines and circulars need to be provided by the Ministry from time and again to local bodies to mainstream sector specific budget/programme in their development plans. Awareness and sensitization programmes on environment, climate change and disaster management to concerned stakeholders are also vital to create demand on environmental issues from local vulnerable community and mainstream them in development plans for their own benefits. As the EFLGP is going to phase out in July 2017, its successful initiatives should be replicated and up scaled by allocating and finding resources from government level. This will ultimately contribute in mainstreaming environment as major agenda in development plans of all local bodies across the country. Also this study can be taken as baseline for further research in this sector.

Acknowledgement

We would like to cordially acknowledge the Environment Friendly Local Governance Programme, Programme Manager, Project Management Unit, Local Development Officers, Executive Officers, field level Monitoring and Evaluation Officers, Energy Officer for their kind support and favor. Without their generous support and encouragement this study would not have been successful. Thanks also go to the DFiD, UNDP/UNEP and UNCDF for their generous support to implement EFLGP, PEI and LoCAL respectively under MoFALD.  

References

·         Local Self Governance Act, 1999

·         Local Bodies Resource Mobilization & Management Methodology, 2012

·         MoFALD, 2013 Assessing policies, programs and Budgets in the local development plans, a study report (unpublished report)

·         Environment Friendly Local Governance Programme (EFLGP): Operational Guidelines (FY 2014/015-2016/017)

Annex 1. Following 14 districts and 54 municipalities were selected for the programme intervention

S.No	Districts	Municipality
1.	Gorkha	1. Gorkha, 2. Palungtar
2.	Lamjung	3. Beshisahar, 4. Sundarbazar
3.	Kaski	5. Pokhara (Sub Metro), 6. Lekhnath
4.	Chitwan	7. Bharatpur, 8.Ratna Nagar,  9. Khairahani, 10. Chitrawan, 11. Narayani, 12. Madi
5.	Nawalparasi	13. Ramgram, 14. Kawasoti, 15. Devchuli, 16. Bardaghat, 17. Gaidakot, 18. Sunawal
6.	Saptari	19. Shambhunath, 20. Kanchanpur, 21. Rajbiraj, 22. Saptakoshi
7.	Siraha	23. Siraha, 24. Mirchaiya, 25. Lahan, 26. Golbazar
8.	Sarlahi	27. Hariban, 28. Malangawa, 29. Lalbandi, 30.  Ishworpur
9.	Dhanusha	31. Janakpur, 32. Dhanusadham, 33. Chhireshwornath, 34. Mithila, 35. Sabaila 36. GaneshmanCharnath
	Udayapur	37. Triyuga, 38. Katar, 39. Beltar-Basaha
11.	Rautahat	40. Gaur, 41. Chandrapur, 42.Garuda
12.	Sindhuli	43. Kamalamai, 44.Dudhauli
13.	Tanahun	45. Shuklagandaki, 46.Vyas, 47.Bhanu, 48. Bandipur, 49. Aanbu Khaireni
14.	Kabhrepalanchowk	50. Banepa, 51.Dhulikhel, 52.Dapcha kasikhanda, 53. Panchkhal, and 54.Panauti