Contribution of Forestry to Poverty Alleviation - APFNet

grass and fodder production in both leasehold plots and private farmlands, growing of multi-purpose
species in leased plots, and vegetable production in private lands, as well as in other entrepreneurial
activities such as collective fish raising, NWFP production, and bamboo and broom grass production
in leasehold plots. The above-mentioned increase of wellbeing is evidenced by an increase of cash
income among the sample households (at 2008 prices). Before the leasehold forestry program, the
sample leasehold member households had an average annual cash income of Nepalese Rupee (NR)
25,589, which in 2008 increased to NR 43,768.
Commercial and Industrial Forestry
Nepal is lagging behind in terms of promoting commercial forestry. Some initiatives on ecotourism,
village industries, and bio-energy are under way and their impacts are not assessed yet. A naturally
beautiful country, Nepal is expected to earn more foreign currency and generate greater employment
opportunities through ecotourism. Most of these initiatives are largely based on private sector
investments. Public sector investment in commercial forestry is not so encouraging. The government’s
efforts in commercial forestry are limited to the marketing of timber and NWFPs through private
sector involvement.
Selling NWFPs, such as Zanthoxylum seeds, to middle men in the village can be a direct way of generating
cash, although the value for the collector is usually low.
A study facilitated by CIFOR (2007) examined the effective practices and constraints of various
community-based village and smallholders’ NWFP enterprises in 13 districts of Nepal, which were
focused on providing benefits to the poor. The tenure reform, i.e. clarifying and strengthening tenure
rights at community level, through various village-based programs in Nepal in the last few decades
enhanced opportunities for the rural poor to benefit from such enterprises. However, a key concern as
these programs advanced over the years was whether the poor were getting benefits, given their high
dependence on forests. The practices of these enterprises that were effective in increasing income
benefits include representation of the poor and marginalized groups in executive committees in the
CFUG-based enterprises and targeted employment of the poorest households in the collection of
NWFPs and in processing units in networks, and enabling the poor to own share capital in cooperatives
and companies (Pandit et. al. 2009).
218
Bishnu Hari Pandit