CONTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY FOREST ON

LIVELIHOOD OF FOREST USERS

(A Case Study of Kerabari And Marsyangdi Community Forests of
Lamjung District, Nepal)

PRATIMA LAMA
2-2-47-71-2017

TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY
INSTITUTE OF FORESTRY
POKHARA CAMPUS
POKHARA

PROJECT PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN
FORESTRY

September 15, 2022

CONTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY FOREST ON
LIVELIHOOD OF FOREST USERS
(A Case Study of Kerabari And Marsyangdi Community Forests of Lamjung
District, Nepal)

Pratima Lama
2-2-47-43-2017
B.Sc. Forestry

Advisor Field Supervisor:

Sabina Lamichhane Santosh Khanal
Assistant Professor Assistant Forest Officer
Institute of forestry, Pokhara Campus Division Forest Office, Lamjung
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Tribhuvan University
Institute of Forestry
Pokhara Campus
Pokhara

Project Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Science in Forestry

September 15, 2022

©Pratima Lama
September, 2022
E-mail: [email protected]

Tribhuvan University
Institute of Forestry
Pokhara Campus
Hariyokharka, Pokhara-15, Kaski
Website: www.iofpc.edu.np

Citation:
Lama, P. (2022). “An Assessment of Contribution of Community Forest on Livelihood of
Forest Users” (A case study from Kerabari and Marsyangdi Community forest, Lamjung). A
project paper submitted for the partial fulfillment of Bachelor of Science in Forestry
Degree, Tribhuvan University, Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal.
Date: 15 September 2022

LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE

i|P age
DECLARATION

I, Pratima Lama, hereby declare that this project paper/internship report entitled “An
Assessment of Contribution of Community Forest on Livelihood of Forest Users (A case
study from Kerabari and Marsyangdi community forest, Lamjung district, Nepal)” is based on
primary work and all the sources of information used are duly acknowledged. This work has not
been submitted to any other university for any academic award.

……………………
Pratima Lama
B. Sc. Forestry
Institute of Forestry
Pokhara Campus, Pokhara
Date:

ii | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

After an intensive period of four month internship, writing this note of thanks is the finishing
touch on my internship as well as project work. It has been a period of intense learning for me,
not only in the scientific arena, but also on a personal level. This study could never have been
possible without continuous support and guidance of many people and institution. However, it is
almost impossible to acknowledge my gratitude and debt to each because of limited space. I
would like to express my sincere thanks to all of those who have directly or indirectly
contributed to the completion of this study.
Foremost, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my academic advisor Assistant Prof. Ms.
Sabina Lamichhane and my field supervisor Mr. Santosh Khanal for their enthusiasm, insights,
thoughtful suggestions and continual prodding during the completion of this thesis and who
painstakingly furnished countless valuable comments and suggestions to improve this study.
Their guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this report.
I am grateful to FRTC for selecting me as an intern in Division Forest office, Lamjung. I want to
thank Division forest officer of Lamjung, Mr. Purneshowr Subedi and all the staff of DFO and
Sub-Division Forest Office, Lamjung, especially to the Mr. Govinda Prasad Paudel, Mr. Buddhi
Gurung and Miss Kabita Tamang for their continuous support and encouragement during my
internship period. I would like to thank my friends Mr. Krishna Thapa Magar and Mr. Aashish
Regmi who helped me with my research work.
Sincere gratitude goes to the committee members and users of Kerabari and Marsyangdi
Community Forest User Group of Lamjung for their kind hospitality and for sharing their
knowledge and information despite their busy schedule.
I am eternally grateful and thankful to my friends namely: Manisha Shrestha, Supriya Rana,
Asmita Bhattachan, Rashmi Paudel, Shweta Parajuli, Isha Adhikari, Krishna Thapa Magar and
Aashish Regmi for the love and inspiration, suggestions, much need emotional and moral
support and for always being there for me.

Last but not the least I would like to dedicate my work to my family for supporting and
encouraging me to pursue my academic career and were responsible for my present status.

Pratima Lama
Institute of Forestry
Pokhara Campus, Pokhara
September, 2022

iii | P a g e
ABSTRACT

Forest is considered as the integral part of livelihood especially for rural communities.
Community Forestry program in Nepal is considered as one of the important part of livelihood
improvement program after its stages of plantation, protection and production in 1970s, 1980s
and 1990s, respectively. Therefore, the users are aware enough for the conservation of the forest
resources while meeting their daily livelihood demands. Yet the benefits are limited to the uses
of forest resources for household purpose only. In an addition, significant number of studies have
shown the declining motivation of users with respect to forest products and community forest
(CF) income especially in hilly region of Nepal. In this context, this study is carried out with a
aim to explore the contribution of CF on two capitals of livelihood of forest user’s i.e social
capital and financial capital. The data was collected from two CFs of Lamjung district viz. -
Kerabari CF and Marsyangdi CF. Different Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools such as
questionnaire survey of household (n=51), focus group discussion, key informant’s interview,
and direct observation and secondary data from journal articles and published reports were used
to collect the information required for the study. The collected data were analyzed using MS
Excel and the results were demonstrated using pie charts, bar diagram and tables. Likert scale
was used to analyze perception of users towards community forest. The study found the
improved economic condition and social assets of the users of the study area after the
implementation of CF program. Also the overall livelihood has become easier after the
intervention of CF program. Hence, the contribution of community forest is appreciable to
improve the livelihood condition of the users. Livelihood supporting programs especially forest
based enterprises are recommended to further enhance-the livelihood condition of users.

KEYWORDS: Community Forest, Community Forest User Groups, Financial Capital,

Livelihood, Social Capital

iv | P a g e
Table of Contents

LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE ........................................................................................................................... i

DECLARATION ......................................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................ iii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................. iv
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... v
List of Figure .......................................................................................................................................... vii
List of Table ...........................................................................................................................................viii
ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background.................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Objectives ...................................................................................................................................... 2
1.2.1 General Objective ................................................................................................................... 2
1.2.2 Specific Objective .................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Rationale/ Justification .................................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Limitation ...................................................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 6
2.1 Community Forest ......................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Livelihood ...................................................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Sustainable Rural Livelihood System Analysis Framework .............................................................. 7
2.4 Livelihood Capitals and Capitals of Pentagon.................................................................................. 8
2.5 Community Forest and Livelihood .................................................................................................. 9
CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS ................................................................................................ 10
3.1 Study Area ................................................................................................................................... 10
3.1.1 Selection of the study area .................................................................................................... 10
3.1.2 General Description of Selected CFs ...................................................................................... 11
3.2 Research design ........................................................................................................................... 13
3.3 Determination of Livelihood Assets .............................................................................................. 14
3.4 Goal, objective, budget allocation and development program of CFUG in relation to gender
equality ............................................................................................................................................. 15
3.5 Measurement of Perception of People ......................................................................................... 15

v|P ag e
3.6 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................ 15
3.6.1 Primary Data ......................................................................................................................... 15
3.6.2 Secondary Data Collection..................................................................................................... 17
3.7 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 17
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................................. 18
4.1 Results ......................................................................................................................................... 18
4.1.1 Socio Economic Characteristics of the Respondents .............................................................. 18
4.1.2 Livelihood Assets ................................................................................................................... 23
4.1.3 Role of Gender in Community Forests ................................................................................... 32
4.1.3.3 Forest management ........................................................................................................... 36
4.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 42
5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 42
5.2 Recommendation ........................................................................................................................ 42
CHAPTER 6: INTERNSHIP DESCRIPTION AND LEARNING ......................................................................... 44
6.1 Internship description .................................................................................................................. 44
6.2 Learnt task ................................................................................................................................... 44
6.2.1 Task on office ........................................................................................................................ 44
6.2.2 Challenges ................................................................................................................................ 45
a. New working environment ..................................................................................................... 45
b. Time management ................................................................................................................. 45
6.3 Internship learning....................................................................................................................... 45
6.4 Conclusion ........................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 46
APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 48
1. Questionnaire ............................................................................................................................ 48
2. Internship Agreement .................................................................................................................... 54
3. Photo plates .................................................................................................................................. 55
.......................................................................................................................................................... 55

vi | P a g e
List of Figure
Figure 1: Sustainable Livelihood Framework (DFID, 1999) ........................................................7
Figure 2: Livelihood Assets Pentagon .........................................................................................8
Figure 3: Study Area Map ......................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4: Study Framework ....................................................................................................... 13
Figure 5: Livelihood Assets ....................................................................................................... 14
Figure6: Caste composition of the respondents in Marsyangdi CF ............................................. 18
Figure 7: Gender Composition of Respondents (Source: Field survey, 2022) ............................. 19
Figure8: Age Structure of Respondents (Source: Field survey, 2022) ........................................ 19
Figure 9: Occupation Status of the respondents (Source: Field survey, 2022) ............................ 20
Figure 10: Investment of the respondent (Source: Field survey, 2022) ....................................... 21
Figure 11: Average landholding of respondents (Source: Field survey, 2022) ............................ 22
Figure12: Family size of the respondents (Source: Field survey, 2022) ...................................... 22
Figure 13: Education Status of the Respondents (Source: Field survey, 2022) ........................... 23
Figure 14: Perception of respondent in relation among CFUGs (Source: Field survey, 2022) ... 24
Figure 15: Perception of Respondents in Networking among CFUGs and Other Institutions ..... 25
Figure16: Participation of respondent in FUGs regular assembly and meeting (Source: Field
survey, 2022) ............................................................................................................................ 27
Figure 17: Respondent Perception on their access to CFUG fund (Source: Field Survey 2022) .. 29
Figure 18: Need of women participation (Source: Field survey, 2022) ...................................... 34
Figure 19: Increased participation of women as compared to 10 years back ............................. 35
Figure 20: Dominancy in meeting/assemblies by gender (Source: Field survey, 2021) .............. 36

vii | P a g e
List of Table
Table 1: Livelihood Assets and its Determining Indicators (Source: DFID, 1999) ..................... 14
Table 2: Description of Focus Group Discussion (Source: Field survey, 2022) .......................... 16
Table 3: Decision making in respondents household (Source: Field survey, 2022)..................... 26
Table 4: The income and Expenditure of Kerabari CFUG fund in different fiscal years ............. 27
Table 5: The income and Expenditure of Marsyangdi CFUG fund in different fiscal years ........ 28
Table 6: Perception of the respondents of Kerabari CFUG towards community forest ............... 30
Table 7: Perception of the respondents of Marsyangdi CFUG towards community forest .......... 31
Table 8: Gender involvements in different forestry activities (Source: Field survey, 2022) ........ 32
Table 9: Respondent Labor contributions (Source: Field survey, 2022) ..................................... 33
Table 10: Perception of respondents on consideration of women voice in decision making
process. ..................................................................................................................................... 37
Table 11: Perception of respondents on gender are equally involved in decision making ........... 37

viii | P a g e
ABBREVIATIONS

AFO Assistant Forest Officer

CF Community Forest
CFUG(s) Community Forest User Group(s)
DAG(s) Dis Advantaged Group(s)
DDC District Development Committee
DFID Department for International Development
DFO District Forest Office
FECOFUN Federation of Community Forestry Users, Nepal
FIG Figure
FUG(s) Forest User Group(s)
FUGC Forest User Group Committee
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HH House Hold
HS Higher Secondary IOF
MFSC Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation
MPFS Master Plan for Forestry Sector
NBC National Biogas Company
NBS Nepal Biodiversity Strategy
NGO(s) Non-Governmental Organization
NTFP Non Timber Forest Product
PF Panchayat Forest
PPF Panchayat Protected Forest
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
SLC School Leaving Certificate SN Serial Number

ix | P a g e
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Nepal has a long history of community forestry. The community forestry programme in Nepal was
initiated in the late 1970s with the enactment of the Panchayat Forest Rules and the Panchayat
Protected Forest Rules(Thani & Kandel, 2021). It was introduced in order to encourage active
participation of local people in the forest management as a mean to improve livelihoods as well as
to control deforestation (Cheng et al., 2016). It is a participatory forest management strategy
implemented by the government of Nepal addressing the twin goal of forest conservation and
poverty reduction ( Persha, 2009; Cheng et al., 2016). The program has been continuously rectified
over time which recognized the use rights of the local people in the management of forest
resources and established them as managers, therefore, became a modifier key.

Within the history of more than 4 decades of implementation, the community forest program now
is considered as the most advanced and progressive model in worldwide for the participatory
management of natural resources (Upreti, 2020). It is one of the most successful steps for the
conservation, management and utilization of forest which ensures ecological sustainability and
local community benefits as central goals, with some degree of responsibility and authority for
forest management formally vested in the community. It is successfully developing in Nepal,
uplifting the livelihoods of rural households in thousands of communities, and nurturing
democracy at the grassroots despite a prolonged insurgency and political upheavals (Ojha and
Pokharel, 2005).

The Master plan for the forestry sector was formulated in the late 1980’s which acknowledge the
community forestry program as first priority in order to promote people’s participation in
development, management as well as utilization of forest resources. Forest Act 1993 and its
regulation 1995 legally fortify this policy such that the local communities sustainably manage the
forest resources in order to improve the livelihoods of user groups (Adhikari, 2002). Forest policy

1|P a ge
2071 has given major priority in managing the forests for income and employment generation
focusing to single woman, disabled ones, dalits and ethnic groups.

In the past few years, the linkage between forests and livelihood has been widely discussed which
clarify that majority of the people in Nepal depends upon the forest resources as a part of their
livelihood system, as their farming does not provide sufficient means to survive on its own (Global
Alliance of Commuity Forestrey (GACF)). Although, forest resources is appearing as key arena of
actions for supporting livelihoods and conserving biodiversity, there is restriction to use them by
rural people where serious income generation is mainly concerned as it is controlled by state forest
agencies, therefore, reducing the contribution of forest towards improving livelihood (G. C.
Dhurba, 2019; Global Alliance of Commuity Forestrey (GACF)).

However, the contribution of community forestry to forest conservation and local institutional
development is widely recognized. Forest deterioration has been quite reversed and forest
condition is gradually improving due to the current community forest experiences. This has
occurred through effective closure and regulations on product extraction by local users leading in
gradually increasing productive forests, providing increased product availability, and in the most
successful cases, income flows which have been re-invested communally in the development of
social and financial capital. Yet there is still limited evidence for the specific extent as well as
nature of community forestry’s contributions to livelihoods, and therefore, research on
“Contribution of Community Forestry on Livelihood of Forest Users” on Lamjung district of
Nepal has been proposed. This study focuses on to analyze the social and financial capital assets
of the Livelihood of Forest Users as well as the inclusiveness of male and women in the
community forestry management.

1.2 Objectives
1.2.1 General Objective
General objective of the research is to study the contribution of community forest on the
livelihood of forest user Group of study area.

2|P a ge
1.2.2 Specific Objective
The specific objectives are;

1. To analyze the contribution of community forest on social and financial capital assets of
the livelihood of forest users.
2. To assess users perception towards community forest.

3. To analyze the role of gender in community forest.

1.3 Rationale/ Justification

Community forestry program has evolved drastically with the aim of protection, management and
utilization of forest products in equity basis. For few years, community forest was only for
protection but not for utilization of products. Later on the policy was changed to manage the forest
on sustainable basis, and CFUGs were allowed to distribute the products and sell the extra forest
products. The CF program addresses twin goals of forest conservation and poverty reduction. About
29% of the total forest is handed over as community forestry in Nepal which accounts to be of
1,813,478 hectare (ha) including 19,361 Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs) where 2,461,549
households have benefited and 1072 CFUGs are composed of women only committee members.
Thus, peoples’ dependency on community forestry and their resources have been profound in Nepal
in order to fulfill their basic needs for forest products and livestock (G. C., 2016).

The community forestry approach considers people as an integral part of a forest ecosystem. It
shows a symbiotic relationship between people and natural environment. Particularly the CF is a
concept of creation, management and a utilization of goods and services generated from the forest
for the benefits of the society. Therefore, CF program is considered as very successful rural
development program to improve the livelihood of people as well as forest condition in three ways
–capital formation in rural communities, policy and government reform of various organizations

3|P a ge
and agencies and contribution in the process of community empowerment and social change
(Pokharel, 2005).

However, with the increasing number of community forest more prominent issues such as elite
domination on decision-making process, lack of transparency, vested interested of powerful people
and inequity in benefit sharing mechanism have been increasing. Community forestry programme
is moving ahead in line with the 10th five year plan of HMG which has emphasized on poverty
alleviation to manage the forest in such a way that it will be worth enough to meet the basic needs
of the people living nearby forest and falling under the line of poverty. But field level situation were
different, the success of Participatory Forest management should not be measured simply in terms
of the protection and regeneration of forest resources, but also in terms of whether or not it meets
the needs of local people (ICIMOD, 1999). The dominance of the elites and influencing person in
the decision making and benefit cost sharing, poor participation of the women and disadvantage
groups, lack of quality leadership and unawareness about the rules and regulations are some of the
existing problems in community forest. Due to the emphasis on the protection, rather than
sustainable utilization, of the resource, the potential benefits, that could be accrued through an
active management of community forest, has remained untapped. The FUG members, especially
those from poorer households, are unable to benefit from community forests which widened the gap
between the poor and rich people, and they are now beginning to lose interest in community
forestry program (Malla, 2002).

Although, CF is an indispensable part of livelihood of the local community, it cannot be sustainable

until it addresses the needs of poor and disadvantaged people (economically depressed, exploited,
oppressed and lower caste people). Therefore, this research helps to assess the contribution of
community forest on the livelihood of forest users in selected CFUGs. It is expected that findings
and recommendations of the study will help foresters, researchers, CFUGs, non-forestry
professionals, NGOs and INGOs to correct the mistakes and improve in designing and
implementing CF programs.

1.4 Limitation
 The study may be conducted in one or more than on CF, thus the result may not provide
the data of whole CF of Lamjung district.

4|P a ge
 Due to time and budget constraint, data will be collected from only two community
forest.
 Most of the households were busy in agricultural activities so they could not give enough
time for answering everything in detail.
 Some respondents hesitated to share their actual views openly during interview and field
survey.
 Few household data will be taken through phone interviews which was difficult to be
verified through direct observation.

5|P a ge
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Community Forest
Community forests (CF) in Nepal are the areas owned by the government which is handed over
to the user groups of a community for its development, protection, management and utilization
which gives user groups the right to access, use, exclusion and management but retains
ownership of the land so that community forest lands cannot be sold or transferred (Thoms,
2008). Over the last two decades, it has been the paradigmatic example of participatory forest
management (Baginski & Dev, 2003). It has been a very successful program and recognized as a
world leader in the development and successful implementation of community forestry program.
It was originally contrive to protect forest and fulfill the basic needs of forest products for the
local people.

Concerning about rapid forest degradation and deforestation as well as increasing poverty,
affecting both the environment and livelihood, the CF program was initiated in Nepal in the late
1970’s and formalized through the promulgation of the forest act, 1993 and forest regulation,
1995 (Adhikari, 2019; Shahi et al., 2022). The forest act, 1993 provided a legal framework for
the government to transfer state-owned forest to Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs).
Community forestry principles include active involvement, equity, ownership, people-centered,
responsive and participatory planning, accountability, cooperation, and a long-term strategy.

The main of objectives community forestry are to help the general socio-economic development
of rural people of all economic levels, as well as to ensure an equitable distribution of forest
resources and other forest-derived incomes. It is a people-centered strategy that emphasizes
poverty reduction, empowerment, and community development to increase security of
livelihoods for the poor (Cheng et al., 2016).

2.2 Livelihood
Livelihood is the means of living which comprises the skills, assets and activities required to
secure a living (Chambers, 1992). A livelihood is sustainable if it allows people to cope with and
recover from shocks and stresses (such as natural catastrophes and economic or social upheavals)

6|P a ge
while also improving their own and future generations' well-being without compromising the
natural environment or resource base. (Zhang, C., 2020).

2.3 Sustainable Rural Livelihood System Analysis Framework

Sustainable Livelihoods is a term that refers to a way of life that is "The capabilities, assets, and
activities necessary for a means of subsistence are referred to as a livelihood (DFID, 1999). It is
an approach to work with individuals and communities which was developed to capture the
many effects of social and economic exclusion on people’s lives, and to learn how they can be
supported to move out of poverty towards resilience and livelihoods (Nomos, 2004).
The Sustainable livelihood improvement framework was initially created by Sussex University's
Institute of Development Studies (IDS), and was then updated and further refined by DFID's
Sustainable livelihood advisory group in 1999. (SAGUN program, 2008). It can be used to both
plan new development activities and assess how existing activities contribute to livelihood
sustainability. It is an effort to visualize livelihoods in a holistic way, capturing various
hindrances of livelihoods and the constraints and opportunities that are subjected to. [one blank
space after completing this sub-heading]

Figure 1: Sustainable Livelihood Framework (DFID, 1999)

7|P a ge
2.4 Livelihood Capitals and Capitals of Pentagon
The assets or capitals are those that people draw upon to make a living (Guidance note on
recovery, UNDP, 2001). The five different types of capitals form the core of livelihood resources
namely human, physical, social, financial and natural. These capitals constitute the actual
building blocks for livelihoods.

Figure 2: Livelihood Assets Pentagon

H= Human Capitals, N= Natural Capitals, F= Financial Capitals, P= Physical Capitals and

S= Social Capitals

The pentagon's shape can be used to illustrate the variation in people's access to assets
(Chapagain, 2007). The idea is that the pentagon's central point, where the lines meet, indicates
no access to assets, while the outer perimeter represents unlimited access (Poudel, 2004).

Human capital: skills, knowledge, the ability to work and good health. Good health is not
simply a means to earning a livelihood; it is of course an end in itself.

Social capital: the social resources that people draw on to make a living, such as relationships
with either more powerful people (vertical connections) or with others like themselves
(horizontal connections), or membership of groups or organizations. Generally relationships of
trust, reciprocity and exchange that the poor can draw on in times of need, and that lower the
costs of working productively together. Like human capital, social capital has an intrinsic value;
good social relationships are not simply a means, they are an end in themselves.

8|P a ge
Natural capital: the natural resource stocks that people can draw on for their livelihoods,
including land, forests, water, air and so on.

Physical capital: the basic infrastructure that people need to make a living, as well as the tools
and equipment that they use. For example; transport and communication systems, shelter, water
and sanitation systems, and energy.

Financial capital: savings, in whichever form, access to financial services, and regular inflows
of money.

2.5 Community Forest and Livelihood

Community Forestry helps to local level livelihood by meeting basic forest product demands as
well as generating money and employment. The forestry sector employs over 18% of our
country's entire labor force (MPFS, 1988). The current community forestry policy is the outcome
of the long-term evolution of forest policy. After several years of policy experimentation, the
government recognized forests as "social property" as well as "national forestry," as opposed to
the previous recognition as "national forestry." The main document in the realm of forestry was
the Master Plan for Forestry Sector 1988. This put a higher emphasis on CF, with CF receiving
47 % of projected investment in the forestry sector (MPFS, 1988).
CF contributes to users' livelihoods through providing basic forest product demands, lowering
the time required to collect forest products, encouraging the use of productive livestock, and stall
feeding, all of which result in improved living standards for users. Community forests are a form
of investment. It supplies material, energy, and people to lower other capital stocks from which
positive livelihood outcomes such as enhanced income, well-being, and agriculture inputs, as
well as reduced vulnerability, can be generated. Access to resources adds to well-being by
improving the income of rural poor households.
Different socioeconomic factors such as landholdings, education, social position, family income,
and so on have a significant impact on forest product demand at the local level (Pokharel et al.,
2018). In their study, Rasaily & Ting (2012) found that poor households rely largely on a CF for
forest goods, but rich and middle-class households frequently get their forest products from their
land. Fodder and leaf litter are in higher demand in households with big agricultural land.

9|P a ge
However, due to a lack of land and/or cattle, poor households consume fewer of these things
(Adhikari et al., 2004).

CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS

This chapter provides information about study area, the data collection and analysis methods that
were used for the research.

3.1 Study Area

Lamjung district was selected as a study area which lies in mid-hills of Gandaki Province, Nepal.
The district is selected because it is under my internship area and is one of the districts where
community forestry program has been implemented and running. It occupies about 1,692 km2
area, having altitudinal variation from 500 meters to 7,690 meters. It lies between 28°16′58.44″
N latitude and 84°26′27.24″ E longitude. It is centrally located being Gorkha in the east, Kaski in
the west, Manang and Gorkha in the north and Tanahu and Gorkha in the south. Climate varies
from tropical climate in lower elevation to alpine and tundra. The main tree species in this
district are Betula utilis, Juniperus indica, Rhododendron campanulatum, Salix nepalensis,
Sorbus microphylla, etc. The population of the district comprises Brahmins, Chettri, Gurung,
Magar, Newars, Tamang, Dura and others occupational castes like Damai(tailor) amd Sunar
(goldsmith).

3.1.1 Selection of the study area

Two community forest user groups formally handed over by District Forest Office were selected
for the study area, i.e. Kerabari CFUG and Marsyangdi CFUG, after the discussion with DFO
staff and reviewing CFUG records. The following points were considered while selecting the
CFUG.
 CFUG was handed over at least five years ago
 CFUG categorized as active group by DFO
 CFUG heterogeneous in terms of wealth, social status and caste
 Inclusion of men and women in FUG.

10 | P a g e
3.1.2 General Description of Selected CFs
Features Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
Year of Handover 2074/ 03/ 32 2051/ 10/ 03
Location Besishahar Municipality-10 Besishahar Municipality-6
Total Area 52.54 Ha 21.21 Ha
Boundary East Laguma Bhir and East Marsyangdi River
Bhachok River
West Ramdu and Nori River West Chautari to Kalika
Than
North Kalleri and deurali North Big Stone River
Gaun

South Bhachok village South East River and Pallo

Padhero Kholsi
Forest Type Natural and Mixed Forest Natural and Mixed Forest
Major Species Saal, Chilaune, Katus, Kafal Saal, Chilaune, Katus,Tooni
Household Number 43 47
Total Population 234 224
Major Ethnic Groups Janjati- Gurungs Brahmin-Chhetri, Dalit
Source: Operational Plan Data

11 | P a g e
Figure 3: Study Area Map

12 | P a g e
3.2 Research design

 Literature Review
 Problem
identification
 Setting of Research
Objectives

Consultation with Data Collection Consultation with Key

Advisor
informants

Primary Data Collection Secondary Data

Collection

 Preliminary field  Review of relevant

visit articles, journals,
 Meeting with and reports
committee
members
 Focus Group
Discussion

Data Analysis

 Qualitative Data
Analysis Draft Report Writing
 Quantitative Data and Final Report
Analysis Submission

Figure 4: Study Framework

13 | P a g e
3.3 Determination of Livelihood Assets
Livelihood comprises of five capitals (i.e. physical, financial, social, natural and human) and
when all these diverse fields combine together and fit smoothly (Fig.4), the condition is assumed
to be improved (DFID, 1994).

Figure 5: Livelihood Assets

This research was therefore to check the contribution of CF on the indicators of two capital
assets i.e. Social and financial capital assets presented in following Table, to the local users of
that CFUG.

Table 1: Livelihood Assets and its Determining Indicators (Source: DFID, 1999)

S.N Livelihood Indicators Assets used

1. Social Capital i. Relation among user groups after handover of CF
ii. Participation of local user in assembly and meeting
iii. Major role played in decision making
iv. Local users in network and connectedness, gender

14 | P a g e
issues, decision-making, membership of more
formalized groups.
2. Financial Capital i. Increment in employment opportunities
ii. Time and cost required for forest products collection
iii. Provisions of loan for IGAs

3.4 Goal, objective, budget allocation and development program of CFUG

in relation to gender equality
Objectives are:
i. Gender balance in community forestry
ii. Leadership development
iii. Women empowerment
iv. Participation in development work
v. Active participation in decision-making of all FUG members, especially women the
preparation of Constitution, Operation Plan and or planning process.
vi. Strengthen FUG in terms of:
vii. Institutional capacity building (including all aspects of good governance)
viii. Participatory planning and monitoring

3.5 Measurement of Perception of People

The perception of respondent’s towards CF was measured in strongly agree to strongly disagree
(1-5) Likert Scale(Gentle, 2000). Selected indicator regarding CF was the basis of measuring the
Users perception.

3.6 Data Collection

Both qualitative and quantitative data were gathered for fulfillment of the research objectives.
Primary and secondary data were collected to catch the mentioned specific and general
objectives.
3.6.1 Primary Data
Following tools will be used for the collection of primary data:

15 | P a g e
3.6.1.1 Household survey / Sampling technique
Since the research focus was on local forest users of the CFUG, simple random sampling was
done. Questionnaire survey was conducted to gather information by using structured
questionnaire format. There were 43 HHs in Kerabari CFUG and 48 HHs in Marsyangdi
CFUG. Out of the total HHs about 50% of total HHs was chosen from each research CFUG by
random means of sampling. Face to face questionnaire was conducted with the respondents to
collect information.

3.6.1.2 Focused Group Discussion (FGD)

Table 2: Description of Focus Group Discussion (Source: Field survey, 2022)

SN Focused Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Group Male Female Total Male Female Total
1. Rich 3 2 5 3 2 5
2. Medium 10 6 16 9 5 14
3. Poor 1 2 3 2 2 4
4. Very Poor 1 1 2 1 1 2
Total 26 Total 25

Focus group discussion was carried out in both the CFUGs using a separate checklist (Annex: 1)
for focus group discussion to explore and discuss research issue and to interact among multiple
respondents of similar backgrounds. Altogether, four focus group discussions (Table 2) were
conducted with two CFUGs. The rich, medium, poor and very poor strata of wealth ranking were
taken for the purpose which was formed on the basis of land holding, present occupation and
livestock holding of family members. There were 3 respondents in Kerabari CF who falls on
poor category and 2 respondents on very poor category and 5 and 16 respondent falls under rich
and medium category. Also, there were 4 respondents in Marsyangdi CF who falls on poor
category and 2 respondents on very poor category and 5 and 14 respondent falls under rich and
medium category.

16 | P a g e
3.6.1.3 Key Informants Interview
The key-informants like village elders, local leaders, school teachers, foresters and social
members were interviewed who were very knowledgeable about forests and local needs and
interests using a separate questionnaire. They were interviewed to get additional informational
set up of community forest user groups, managerial capability, Decision making process, income
generation opportunities to users, conflict resolution mechanism and leadership characteristics of
the committee members.

3.6.1.4 Meeting with Committee Members

After the review of relevant documents of each questionnaire survey and focus group meetings,
meeting with committee members was organized. The key questions related to the research and
issues identified during data collection were discussed during the meeting.

3.6.1.5 Direct observation

Direct observation was made to know the biophysical attributes of the forest; the developmental
activities conducted in the village and to triangulate the information gathered during focus group
discussion, interview and questionnaire survey.

3.6.2 Secondary Data Collection

The CFUG's operational plan, constitution, financial, and administrative records were thoroughly
examined to make reading, comparing, and triangulating data from other sources easier. Other
information was gathered from DFO Lamjung and various sources on the internet.

3.7 Data Analysis

The information collected were compiled and analyzed with descriptive methods to assess social
and physical capital assets of livelihood. The data was analyzed with the help of statistical
packages IBM SPSS Statistics20 (statistical package for social sciences) and MS-Excel. The
result is presented in text, tables, figures and charts and interpreted accordingly.

17 | P a g e
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Results

4.1.1 Socio Economic Characteristics of the Respondents

4.1.1.1 Caste Composition of the Respondents

In Kerabari CFUG, the respondents were found to be janjati’s (i.e. Gurungs) only i.e. 100%.
However, in Marsyangdi CFUG, the FUGS were composed of different ethnic group. Out of
total respondents, 48% were Janajati, 40% Chhetri and 12% dalits. Here, Janajati includes Magar
and Dalit includes Pariyar.

Chhettri Dalit Janjati Gurung

100%

48%
40%

12%
0% 0% 0% 0%

Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Figure 6: Caste composition of the Respondents

4.1.1.2. Gender Composition of the Respondents

The female respondents comprise a major segment in Kerabari CF, 46% of respondents were
Male and 54% were female whereas the male respondents comprise a major segment in
Marsyangdi CF, 60% of respondents were Male and 40% were female.

18 | P a g e
70%
60%
60% 54%
50% 46%
40%
40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
Male Female

Figure 7: Gender Composition of Respondents

4.1.1.3 Age Structure of the Respondents

The age of the respondents were categorized into 3 groups: 15-45, 45-60 and above 60 years.
Figure 5 shows that more number of the total respondents of Kerabari CFUG (47%) belonged to
15-45 years age class and similar to that of Kerabari CF, Marsyangdi CFUG also belonged to
15-45 years age class (68%).

80%
68%
70%
60%
50% 47%

40% 37%
28%
30%
20% 16%

10% 4%
0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
15- 45 45-60 Above 60

Figure 8: Age Structure of Respondents

19 | P a g e
4.1.1.4 Occupation Status of the Respondents
Agriculture was the main occupation of most of the households in both CFs as shown in figure 6,
but also other occupations like business, service, foreign remittance and wage labor were equally
followed which somehow reduces the dependency on forest on both CFUGs.
60% 54%
50%

40% 36%

30% 27%
20% 20%
20%
12% 12%
8%
10% 4% 4%
3%
0%
0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
Agriculture Business Pension
Remittance Service within Nepal Wage Labor

Figure 9: Occupation Status of the respondents

4.1.1.5 Investments of the Respondents

Expenditure of the respondents of both the CFUGs were compared before and after the formation
of CFUGs, in a sense that weather the CFUG has made any changes in their expenditure. There
were little changes in expenditure but it was from other reasons rather the formation of CFUGs.
Therefore, figure 7 shows the investment of the respondents of both CFUGs in different
commodities at present situation.

20 | P a g e
70%
62% 61%
60%

50%

40%

30%

20%
9% 10% 10% 9% 11%
6% 8% 6%
10% 4% 4%
0%
Food Education Agriculture Festival Health Clothes
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Figure 10: Investment of the respondent

4.1.1.6 Land Holding of the Respondent Households

The major land types of the households were categorized as Khet, Bari and Kharbari. Generally,
Khet (lowland) is a plain irrigated fertile land suitable for paddy and wheat crops. Some Khet
lands also appeared in small terraces on the mountain slopes. Bari (upland) is non-irrigated and
terraced upland where only limited crops are cultivated and Kharbari is grassland.
Average land holding by respondents households of Kerabari CFUG is 0.35 ha (6.92 ropani)
Khet, 0.13 ha (2.52 ropani) Bari and 0.12 ha (2.3 ropani) Kharbari. Similarly, land holding by
respondents households of Marsyangdi CFUGs is 0.23 ha (4.05 ropani) Khet, 0.17 ha (3.4
ropani) Bari and 0.14 ha (2.67 ropani) Kharbari whereas the average size of land holding in
Nepal is less than 0.5 hectares per household.

21 | P a g e
8
6.92
7

5
4.05 Khet
4 3.4 Bari
3 2.52 2.67
2.3 Kharbari
2

0
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Figure 11: Average landholding of respondents

4.1.1.7 Family Size of the Respondents

Population size is one of the good indicators of degree of interaction with environment. The total
family size of selected 26 HHs of Kerabari CFUG is 135 people and out of total HHs 54% have
1-5 no., 39% have 5-10 no. and 7% have 10 above no. of people. Average family size per HH is
5. Whereas total family size of selected 25 HH of Marsyangdi CFUG is 107 people and average
family size per HH is 4. Out of that 56% have 1-5 no. and 44% have 5-10 no. of people whereas
the average size of family in Nepal is 4.6 people.

Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

7% 0%

1 to 5 44% 1 to 5
5 to 10 5 to 10
39% 54%
10 above 56% 10 above

Figure 12: Family size of the respondents

22 | P a g e
4.1.1.8 Education Status of the Respondents
Education status of the respondents was classified broadly into illiterate, literate and well
educated. Those who can’t read and write were illiterate; those who can read and write were
considered as literate and those who passed the high school level or above were categorized as
well educated. Figure 10 shows that 39% of the total respondents of Kerabari CFUG were
literate, 54 % were illiterate and only 7% of the total respondents were well educated. Likewise,
52% of the total respondents of Marsyangdi CFUG were literate, 36% were illiterate and 12% of
the total respondents were well educated.
60% 54% 52%
50%
39%
40% 36%

30%

20%
12%
10% 7%

0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
Illitrate Literate Well Educated

Figure 13: Education Status of the Respondents

4.1.2 Livelihood Assets

4.1.2.1 Social Capital

Social capital can be created through group formation and by building relationship of trust,
reciprocity and co-operation (Douglas, 2000). As a public good, social capital benefits every
member of the public whether individuals contribute or not.

4.1.2.1.1 Relation among users group after CFUG handover

According to the respondents, in Kerabari CFUG, relation among CFUGs after CF handover
were very good (62%), good (28%), fair (97%) bad (3%) respectively. Whereas, in Marsyangdi

23 | P a g e
CFUG, relation among CFUGs after CF handover were very good (58%), good (30%), fair
(10%) bad (2%) respectively.

70%
62%
60%
58%

50%

40%
28% 30%
30%

20%
10%
10% 7%
3% 2%
0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
Very Good Good Fair Bad

Figure 14: Perception of respondent in relation among CFUGs

4.1.2.1.2 Networking among CFUG and other institution

Both the CFUGs had its relationship with other organizations that were officially related with it
(i.e. Co-operative institutions, mother's group, local banks, local schools, farmers group, and
other saving credit groups and neighboring CFUGs) but was not good and formal. Both had
network with DFO, FECOFUN, GOs, NGOs, and other organizations which were also
responsible for raising funds for income-generating activities, private and bare land plantation
(fodder species, NTFP species, timber species, and hybrid grass spp. plantation), and the
construction of improved stoves and biogas plants, with a focus on DAG and other users.

The respondents of both the CFUGs were asked about the networking with CFUGs and other
institutions. About 10% responded very good, 22% good, 17% fair enough and 51% disagreed
with networking with CFUGs and other institutions in Kerabari CF. On the other hand only 5%
responded very good, 21% good, 26% fair enough and maximum 48% not at all in Marsyangdi
CF. Both the CF seem to be very poor at networking with CFUGs and other institutions as shown
in Figure based on field data.

24 | P a g e
60%
51%
50% 48%

40%

30% 26%
22% 21%
20% 17%
10%
10% 5%
0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
Very Good Good Fair No Networking

Figure 15: Perception of Respondents in Networking among CFUGs and Other Institutions

4.1.2.1.3 Gender and Decision Making

Gender discrimination has always been a burning issue in any developing society. It has been
recognized as one of the main cause of reducing social capital in any CFUGs. In this research,
the respondents were asked about the role of male and female in making decision in the family.

In both CFUGs, female played prime role in most of the decisions regarding household task,
looking after children, collecting forest products, while male plays prime role in raising crops in
the field and going for outside work. Most of the important decision in a house is made my head
male member of the family. Majority of the decision regarding household investment, going for
earning is made by head male member of the family. While combined decision is taken regarding
family planning. However, female were not suppressed by their male counterpart unlike most of
the other parts of the country. Combined decision were made regarding household investment,
going for earning, completed family size and birth spacing. This result was found to be quite
similar with the research Malla, 2003, Chaudhari, 2018.

25 | P a g e
Table 3: Decision making in respondents household (Source: Field survey, 2022)

Activities Decision Makers (%)

Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
Male Female Both Male Female Both
Household Task 8 77 16 16 60 24
Looking After Children 7 70 23 8 64 28
Forest Product Collection 15 62 23 4 56 40
Household Investment 62 15 23 68 12 20
To Go For Earning 77 7 16 68 8 24
Raising Crops In The 43 19 38 36 8 56
Field
Family Planning 43 11 46 40 8 52
Going For Outside Works 66 15 19 64 12 24
This shows their strength in social capital. Furthermore, training related to gender, women
empowerment and legal literacy should be conducted more often in the CFUGs to improve
women empowerment.

4.1.2.1.4 Local Users in Assembly and Meetings

In order to find out the participation of user groups of both the CF in FUG’s regular assembly, the
respondents were asked to answer in four scales, viz. always, most of the time, sometimes and rarely.
Figure 16 shows the maximum users always participate in FUGs regular assembly and meetings from
both the CF, in which 62% respondents responded always participate, 16% most of the time, 15% said
sometimes and 7% said rarely in Kerabari CF. Where as in Marsyangdi CF, 44% responded always, 36%
most of the time, 16% sometime and 4% rarely attend the FUGs meetings and assembly. Finding
resembles with G. C et.al (2019) where the participation of forest users in assembly and meeting and
discussion in both the CFUGs was high as people have more affection towards CF and its conservation
activities.

26 | P a g e
70%
62%
60%

50%
44%
Always
40% 36%
Most of the time
30%
Sometime
20% 16% 15% 16% Rarely

10% 7%
4%
0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Figure 16: Participation of respondent in FUGs regular assembly and meeting

4.1.2.2 Financial Capital

Financial capital is recognized as most flexible capital. It refers to the financial resources that people
utilize in order to fulfill their livelihood goals. It can be utilized to create multiple kinds of capital.
Financial capitals were investigated in this study by looking at the CFUG's income and expenditures, the
users' participation in income-generating activities, their access to group funds, and the CFUG's
expenditures for DAG and women-focused programs. These were the criteria used to evaluate CF's
contribution to the benefit of local users.

4.1.2.2.1 The Income and Expenditure of CFUG

Table 4: The income and Expenditure of Kerabari CFUG fund in different fiscal years

Fiscal Year Income(NRs) Expenditure(NRs)

2073/2074 93,874.62 73,675.13
2075/2076 1,00,000 80,001
2077/2078 95,364.7 69,302.6
(Source: Financial Record of CF)

27 | P a g e
Table 5: The income and Expenditure of Marsyangdi CFUG fund in different fiscal years

Fiscal Year Income(NRs) Expenditure(NRs)

2073/2074 76,345.78 53,065.97
2075/2076 80,545 65,065
2077/2078 70,362.3 50,550.6
(Source: Financial Record of CF)

The annual income of both the CFUG was consistent. It was found to somewhat increasing
pattern every year. However, due to covid pandemic, the financial aspect of both the CFUG in
the fiscal year 2077/2078 had been reduced. Annual income was higher in 2075/2076 fiscal year.
Both groups fund was deposited in a local bank with the joint signature of the President,
Secretary, and the Treasurer of CFUGC. The annual income of both CFUGs is expended in
different expenditures such as: forest development and management, social development,
administration management, in education, trainings, tours and other income generating activities
of CFUG every year. Total of 35% is invested in pro-poor activities, 40% in forest community
development and rest in community development are used by both the CFs in community level
which found similar to the research Bhandari et.al. (2019). These were the criteria used to assess
CF's contribution to the benefit of local users. Further, Kerabari CF was seems to be more active
than Marsyangdi CF.

4.1.2.2.1.1 Sources of Income of the Group

The major source of income of the group was from the sale of forest products. In Kerabari CF,
income were given in lease with interest (about 3% interest) to the user groups for their business,
furniture company or any other works which plays a significant role as a source of income.
Besides that, other sources included membership registration fee, interest from loan of revolving
fund and external support.

The membership fee per household had to pay Rs.50 per year. The new member who migrated
from elsewhere had to pay Rs.1000 to get the membership of CFUG and if any HH split, then the
new HH had to pay Rs.500 to get enrolled in the group. No privilege was provided for the

28 | P a g e
disadvantaged segment in this regard. Also, both the CFUGs had fine system, if at least one
member of the household was not present in the regular meetings.

Majority of the users were aware about the income amount and sources of CFUG fund in both
the CF which was announced during their regular assembly and meetings. Record keeping
system in both the CFUGs was good. Record was available as to how much amount was
obtained from which source in which fiscal year.

4.1.2.2.1.2 Access to CFUG Fund

Majority of the respondents of Kerabari CF were High agreed (62%) regarding the consideration
of their views during the investment of CFUG fund, opposite to that majority of respondents of
Marsyangdi CF (27%) highly disagreed on it. 31% and 33% Medium agreed the statement in
Kerabari CF and Marsyangdi CF respectively and 7% low agreed and 40% high agreed in
Kerabari CF and Marsyangdi CF respectively as shown in figure. Also majority of the users in
Kerabari CF were getting loans from the CFUG fund while there was no such facility in
Marsyangdi CF. Some respondent of Marsyangdi CF has agreed with getting loans from the CF
in the past but not in present due to the initial formation of the committee. This shows that, the
majority of users are aware of the income of CFUG in both the CF, however, the users of
Marsyangdi CF were unable to use the facility of loans from CFUG fund and they are quite
unsatisfied with it.

70%
62%
60%

50%
40%
40% 33% High
31%
30% 27% Medium
20% Low

10% 7%

0%
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Figure 17: Respondent Perception on their access to CFUG fund

29 | P a g e
4.1.2.3 Perception of Respondents towards CF
Weighted mean is used to statistically analyze the perception of the respondents towards
community forest. The weighted mean is a type of mean that is calculated by multiplying the
weight (or probability) associated with a particular event or outcome with its associated
quantitative outcome and then summing all the products together. It is very useful when
calculating a theoretically expected outcome where each outcome has a different probability of
occurring.

Table 6: Perception of the respondents of Kerabari CFUG towards community forest

SN Statements St. Agree Agree Neutral Disagree St. Weighted

Disagree Mean
1. Fuel wood is 3 20 24 12 10 2.65
available more than
before
2. Timber is available 2 4 30 36 15 3.35
more than before
3 Views of all users is 2 34 12 8 5 2.34
considered during
the preparation of
Constitution & Op
4. Fair Decision is 7 30 6 4 5 2.00
taken regarding the
nomination of
candidates for
training, workshop,
study tours
5. Each member has an 6 32 6 4 5 2.03
equal opportunity to
become elected in
committee members
* Note: Strongly Agree-1, Agree-2, Neutral-3, Disagree-4, Strongly disagree-5

(Source: Field survey, 2022)

30 | P a g e
Table 7: Perception of the respondents of Marsyangdi CFUG towards community forest

SN Statements St. Agree Agree Neutral Disagree St. Weighted

Disagree Mean
1. Fuel wood is 10 16 12 4 10 2.08
available more than
before
2. Timber is available 1 10 18 44 10 3.32
more than before
3 Views of all users is 8 18 15 4 10 2.20
considered during
the preparation of
Constitution & Op
4. Fair Decision is 5 30 69 8 5 2.16
taken regarding the
nomination of
candidates for
training, workshop,
study tours
5. Each member has an 9 20 9 8 5 2.04
equal opportunity to
become elected in
committee members
* Note: Strongly Agree-1, Agree-2, Neutral-3, Disagree-4, Strongly disagree-5

(Source: Field survey, 2022)

The weighted mean for the statement “Fuel wood is available more than before” in Kerabari CF
is 2.65 which is nearly 3 that means respondents were neutral whereas in Marsyangdi CF is 2.08
which is nearly 2 that means respondents were agreed regarding the fuel wood availability more
than before. The respondents were almost neutral about the statement “timber is available more
than before” i.e. 3.32 and 3.35 in both the CFUGs. Similarly, the respondents of both the CFUGs
were near to agree on the statement “views of all users were considered during the preparation of
Constitution & Op” i.e. 2.20 and 2.34. The respondents of Kerabari CF were almost neutral
about the statement “decisions regarding the nomination of candidates for the training,

31 | P a g e
workshop, and study tour” i.e. 2.16 whereas the respondents of Marsyangdi CF were agreed on
the statement i.e. 2.00 and “Each member had an equal opportunity to become elected in the
committee members.” as weighted mean of both the CFUGs were near 2 i.e. 2.03 and 2.04
respectively.

4.1.3 Role of Gender in Community Forests

4.1.3.1 Gender involvement
The respondents were asked about their daily HH activities and different forestry activities. It
was resulted from respondents of Marsyangdi CF that in basic forest products collection and
grazing activities there is dominancy of female whereas equal participation in Kerabari CF which
found similar to the research (Joshi, 2015).
In Marsyangdi CF, in plantation, nursery management, pruning, thinning, forest product
distribution and OP preparation works both male and female are actively and equally involved
however, pruning, thinning and felling works are under male dominancy but both male and
female are actively and equally involved in plantation, nursery management, forest product
distribution and OP preparation activities in Kerabari CF. Form the analysis it was found that
female were more active in Kerabari CF than Marsyangdi CF in which the activities were
mentioned in table below. The response from sampled HH is given below:
Table 8: Gender involvements in different forestry activities (Source: Field survey, 2022)
Activities Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF
M F M/f F/m M/F M F M/f F/m M/F
Grazing
Fuel wood
collection
Grass/leaf
litter/fodder
collection
Plantation
Nursery
Management
Pruning/thinning
Felling
Forest product
distribution
OP preparation

32 | P a g e
M: Exclusively male, F: Exclusively female M/f: Dominated by male
F/m: Dominated by female M/F: Equally by male and female

4.1.3.2 Gender involvement/ decision in different HH and daily activities

Table 9: Respondent Labor contributions (Source: Field survey, 2022)

Activities Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

M F M/f F/m M/F M F M/f F/m M/F
Collect Water
cook/washing/cl
eaning
Decision-
Making
Training
Workshop
Ploughing
Marketing/purch
asing
HH goods
Social Campaign
Feed
cattle/livestock
Care
Seed
sowing/fertilizin
g
VDC activities
Getting loan and
Investment
Marriage of son
and
Daughter
Selling and
buying of
Land
Service and
business
M: Exclusively male, F: Exclusively female M/f: Dominated by male
F/m: Dominated by female M/F: Equally by male and female

4.1.3.2 Analyzing participation with respect to gender status

33 | P a g e
Participation of both male and female is crucial for deriving right decision and managing the
forest properly. Different statements were placed to respondents to analyze the participation in
different activities with respect to gender status.

4.1.3.2.1 Perception of respondent regarding men and women participation in CF activities

In Kerabari CFUG, most of respondents said there is good participation of female than male as it
was the CF being managed by women committee. The respondents were asked to place their
thoughts on women participation where about 75% respondents said that women role is very
essential for CF development. About 25% of respondents came to feel that women role is
essential for proper and sustainable management of CF.
However, in Marsyangdi CF, there was more participation of men as compared to women. 82%
of respondents in Marsyangdi CFUG realized that women role is the most (very essential) and
about 18% of respondents came to feel that women role is essential for the greenery of CF and
change in livelihood of users.
Recognization of women participation in community forestry has been increased in both the
CFUGs. Men believe that women should participate in CF programs because they know forest,
its management and proper utilization better than men.
Following chart verifies essentiality of equal participation of men and women and perception of
respondents on “women’s participation has changed positively as compare to ten-year back”.

Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

0% Very 0% Very
25% 18%
Essential Essential
Essential Essential

Not Essential Not Essential

75% 82%

Figure 18: Need of women participation

34 | P a g e
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Satisfactory Satisfactory
5% 0%

43%
Nothing Nothing
Changed 56% 44% Changed
52%
Good Good
0% 0%
Excellent Excellent

Figure 19: Increased participation of women as compared to 10 years back

4.1.3.2.2 Perception about ideas of women in meetings and their consideration

Woman plays a vital role in decision making in both the CFUGs. They were encouraged to put
forward their ideas in the assembly and meetings. It is good to know that women voices also
considered in every activity of CFUGs.
From the study it is found that 100% respondents have said that women have been sharing their
ideas in meetings, assembly on different CF and Community development activities in both
Kerabari CF and Marsyangdi CF. Infact the Kerabari CF was mostly led by the females.
However, in Marsyangdi CF, due to their conservative thinking especially the old aged people,
not every thought of women were considered. But the thoughts of young generation were
different from old aged one. They try to involve every women view who was willing to share.
In this matter all of respondents are positive in their voice consideration. They also concluded
voice should be heard if it is genuine and applicable for implementing OP and other social and
forest activities.

35 | P a g e
4.1.3.2.3 Dominancy in meetings/assemblies
It is found, in Kerabari CF there is representation of male and female in meetings by 24.7% and
75.3% respectively whereas in Marsyangdi CF it is by 82.6% and 17.4% respectively, from
sampled respondents of both CF. It has been shown in figure below:
90 82.6%
80 75.3%
70
60
50
Male
40
Female
30 24.7%
20 17.4%

10
0
Kerabari CF Marsyangdi CF

Figure 20: Dominancy in meeting/assemblies by gender

From the figure, it is seen that females in Kerabari CF were more dominated in the meetings and
assemblies as it was the CF being managed by the female committee and they know better about
their community forest. However, in Marsyangdi CF, male were more dominated mainly due to
their conservative thinking, especially old aged people, being superior then female. Therefore,
females in Marsyangdi Cf should be encourage to raise their voices in such meetings.

4.1.3.3 Forest management

For proper management they have divided whole forest area into five blocks in both Kerabari
and Marsyangdi CFUG. Different treatments were applied in one block each year with the
provision to remove dead; dying, diseased species from the forest at the time of forest has been
opened. Both men and women participate equally. But women inclusion is found to be high in
grazing, fuel-wood collection and grass/leaf litter/fodder collection in both CFUGs.

4.1.3.3.1 Decision-making process

36 | P a g e
Decision-making in CFUGs is crucial for implementation of the activities in an equitable manner
with ensuring sustainability. The success or failure of CF would mostly depend upon decision
made by user group/ committee whether or not it is socially acceptable, technically feasible and
economically viable. Forest Act 1993 & succeeding bylaws recognized CFUG as an autonomous
organization where decision made by CFUG & CFUC play crucial role in managing the forest
and community development.
From the study, it is found that most of respondents of Kerabari CFUGs are towards excellent
(i.e.80%) having mean 3.73 and most of the respondents of Marsyangdi CFUG are towards good
(i.e. 72%) having mean 3.28 with the statement inquired as “Consideration of women voice in
decision-making process”. It has been shown in table 6 below.
Table 10: Perception of respondents on consideration of women voice in decision making
process.

Name of Statements Responses in % within each Mean

CFUGs Category
Poor Fair Good Excellent
Kerabari Consideration of women 0 0 20 80 3.73
CFUG voice in decision-making
Marsyangdi process 0 0 72 28 3.28
CFUG
(Source: Field survey, 2022)
Similarly, the majority respondents of both Kerabari and Marsyangdi CFUG agreed with the
statement “genders are equally involved in decision-making. Mean score is 1.72 and 1.87 of
Kerabari and Marsyangdi CFUG respectively indicating the most of HHs agreed the statement.
Clearly shown in table 11 below.
Table 11: Perception of respondents on gender are equally involved in decision making
process

Name Statements Responses in %within each category Mean

CFUGs Gender are Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
equally agree Disagree
involved in (5)
Kerabari decision- 28 67 5 0 0 1.77
CFUG making
Marsyangdi process 19 75 6 0 0 1.87
CFUG
(Source: Field survey, 2022)

37 | P a g e
4.1.3.4 Income Generating Activities

IGAs help in uplifting the livelihood status of the users as well as the development of the
community. It can provide local employment and can be one of the driving forces for their
overall development. Participation includes organization, empowerment and outcome and here
they are user groups, IGAs, employment and products respectively. IGAs also empowers rural
people to adopt new technology, increase their innovative power, subsequently increase there
inclusion in society.

Traditionally the users are quite familiar in chicken, goat raising business. It is good source of
income for their subsistence level income. CFUGs members are practicing cow, buffalo keeping
for milk production as nutritive food. The manure is utilized to maintain the fertility of their land.
The over milk production is sold for cash income. Users of both CFUGs are also involving in
vegetable farming which is one of the major sources of income for them.

Form the study, it is found, some IGAs program have been conducted in both CFUGs. e.g.
cardamom cultivation, goat farming (small scale), poultry farming etc.

4.2 Discussion
This chapter discusses the results presented in the previous chapter with respect to possible
causes and consequences which illustrate that the CF under study had significantly contributed to
social and financial capitals of livelihood. The findings from other research (Bharat et al., 2004;
Dev, O.P et al., 2003; Chapagain,.2009;Joshi, 2015, Arbin, 2017; and Chaudhari , 2018, Upreti,
2020) also coincide with the findings of my research.
From the study it is found that the relation among most user groups in both the CF was found to
be very good which concludes that there was quite good relation among the people in CFUG in
every aspect of social, financial state as there was good mutual understanding and cooperation
between the user’s group. Most of the respondents in both the CFs were regular in general
assembly and meeting of CFUGs as they have very good affection towards CF and their
conservation activities as they know the value of CF in their livelihood. There were very few
respondents who were rarely present in CF meeting and assembly due to old age or busy on their
household. This Finding resembles with G. C et.al (2019), Arbin, 2017, etc. where the

38 | P a g e
participation of forest users in assembly and meeting and discussion was high as people have
more affection towards CF and its conservation activities. However, the networking and
relationships among the CFUG members and other institutions at both the CFs were not strong
due to the initial establishment of Kerabari CFUG and initial formation of the committee in the
Marsyangdi CF.

In both the CFUGs, women were the one who used to make the majority of decisions on
household tasks, child care, and forest product collecting while males were in charge of
managing or cropping the crops in the field and going out to work. The family's top male
member was the one who makes the majority of the household's income and investment
decisions. There were some families who were involving both male and female’s opinion to
make up the decision which shows that there was increasing women’s role in decision making as
of male, which was helped in improving women empowerment. This result of Gender and
decision making in different task was found to be quite similar with Malla et.al. (2003).,
Chaudhari, 2018 where males were active in outdoor activities and females were on to household
activities.

The income generation in both the CFUGs was mainly through the selling of firewood, fodder,
NTFPs. The income was also gained through the annual membership of CFUG. Different income
generating activities are also helping in increasing annual income of CF. Expenditure was done
on forest development and management, social development, administrative management,
education, trainings, tours. Community Forest makes its expenses by coordination with the UG’s
in general assembly where decision is made, on which expenses on activities are planned and is
approved by executive committee and expenses are made on decided task and activities. Overall,
40% of the CFUG income is invested in community development and 35% in forest conservation
and rest 25% in IGA’s for poor and marginalized people, from the decision from executive
committee and approval from assembly. The study was found to be similar with findings of
Bhandari et.al. (2019) and similar to community forest guideline of Nepal.

Majority of respondents in both the CFUGs were well-known about the CFUG fund mobility,
investment and deposition of CFUG fund. The study was found to be similar with (Singh, 2020)

39 | P a g e
because of their interest towards CF and its mobility of fund. Perception of respondents towards
CF coincide with the finding of similar research Chaudhari et al., (2018), where he can conclude
that statement of “Views of all users were considered during the preparation of Constitution and
OP” was found to be agreed, as during preparation of constitution and op people’s views and
opinion were mainly taken or considered. Whereas, fair decision in training, workshop and Each
member have an equal opportunity to become elected in committee members found to be neutral,
mainly because of elite capture; there were not fair decision in workshop and training and also,
they “elite” want to have themselves or their relatives in topmost position of committee member
other subcommittee. However, respondents perception were found to be neural on the statements
“Fuel wood is available more than before” and “Timber is available more than before” which
oppose the research Chaudhari et al., (2018).

Different forest management activities and income generating activities were also carried out by
both the CFUGs for the conservation of community forest in sustainable manner. Plantation
program, silvicultural operations, timber and firewood harvesting, community development
activities, income generation activities, awareness program were the main forest management
activities that were carried out in CF with the aid of different institute with the participation of
local people for the conservation and management of forest and its products.

The respondents were asked about their daily HH activities and different forestry activities. It
was resulted from respondents of Marsyangdi CF that in basic forest products collection and
grazing activities there is dominancy of female whereas equal participation in Kerabari CF.
Recognization of women participation in community forestry has been increased in both the
CFUGs. The study was found to be similar with the research (Joshi, 2015). Women are mainly
involved in livestock grazing, fuel wood collection, grass/leaf litter/ fodder collection in
Marsyangdi CFUGs whereas male and female both equally involved in Kerabari CFUG and
collection of water, cook/washing/cleaning are the major house activities women of both CFUGs
engaged in. Also, Women have been sharing their ideas in meetings and assemblies. They
express their vision on the floor and their voice also considered for discussion in both the CFUG.
However there is majority of male in meetings/assemblies in Marsyangdi CFUG. But incase of
Kerabari CFUG as most of the executive members are women. Further, some IGAs activity has

40 | P a g e
been done in both CFUGs. Activities that have been done were not gender focused. Funds has
not been invested for gender equality, gender awareness even there is no significant strategy for
gender equality, awareness and CF activities.

41 | P a g e
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
After final data analysis and interpreting result and discussion conclusion and recommendation
will be finalized.

5.1 Conclusion
From the study both the CFs has shown promising results in fulfilling the needs of the users like
the utilization of forest products, i.e. fodder, fuel wood, etc. Also the community developmental
works are being held with the income generated by CFUG. However, the networking and the
relation within the CFUGs members, between the CFUGs and with the other institutions is being
neglected. Further, majority of the local users show positive response towards community forest.
They agree that CF program is contributing to some extent to raise their livelihood. Both
financial and social capitals in both the CFUGs were in good condition, indicating improved
livelihood quality, social understanding, mutual cooperation, income generation activities, after
the forest was handed over to the community.

5.2 Recommendations
Following recommendations have been made on the basis of the result and discussion mentioned
above and the conclusion.
i. More in-depth research with a more focused quantitative study specifically based on
social and financial assessment tools and methodologies, particularly on methodological
progress, is needed.
ii. The financial component of management should be incorporated by allocating loans for
income-generating activities (IGAs) to improve the economic position of user members.
iii. Programs supporting the use of alternative energy sources such as bio briquettes,
improved cooking stoves, and biogas should be expanded to as many homes as possible;
local people should be educated on how to reduce the strain on forest products and
replace them with alternative sources.
iv. Empowerment of women and strengthen social capital assets, extensive gender, women
empowerment, and legal literacy training is required.

42 | P a g e
v. Much training related to gender, women empowerment and legal literacy must be
conducted to empower women and strength social capital asset.
vi. IGAs should be organized by the development agency on the basis of their local
resources.
vii. After provision of training, the initial financial support should be given to the users to use
the acquired skill & knowledge to initiate income generation activities.
viii. Forest based enterprises should be started for the further support in the livelihood of the
people.
ix. Formal and informal education i.e. adult learning (Praud Sikshya) in both CF should be
organized.
x. Equal emphasis should be given to women and poor for IGAs through CF management
and such practices should be sustained.
xi. CFUG’s fund has to be invested for gender equality, gender awareness, IGAs and CF
activities.

43 | P a g e
CHAPTER 6: INTERNSHIP DESCRIPTION AND LEARNING
6.1 Internship description

Internship is the best alternative of traditional practice of asking students to work on a small
project paper for the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor in
Forestry. It helps the student gain experience in working in an office setting. The main motto of
this internship is the establishment of a two-way partnership between the host governmental
office and the student. The most significant aspects of this approach for the students are to learn
while contributing to the host governmental office’s day to day activities. Students get a
workplace to showcase the skills that they have learned in the real world and opportunity to learn
some soft skills (e.g. good communication skills, critical thinking, time management abilities,
problem-solving skills, team work, self- confidence, ability to accept and learn from criticism,
etc.) which have proven to be effective over many years. The host organization, on the other
hand, gets some of its work done. Only theoretical knowledge hemisphere is not sufficient for
the students to function. So, practical knowledge of how to work officially, how to deal with the
situation is also required and this internship provided me that opportunity.

Acknowledging the learning beyond the walls of classroom, emphases have been placed on
internship in an undergraduate course of Forestry by Tribhuvan University. This internship was
done for the partial fulfillment requirements of B.Sc. Forestry degree. Forest research and
training center (FRTC) mobilized the students to different organizations working on natural
resource management across Nepal. As a part of this, I was assigned as an intern in District
Forest Office in Lamjung district later than assigned to Besishahar Sub-division, Gandaki
Province by Forest Research and Training Centre. I was assigned to perform my duties under the
theme “Community Based Forest Management”. Internship period was of 4 month long starting
from 5th Falgun, 2078 to 5th Ashad, 2079.

6.2 Learnt task

6.2.1 Task on office

 Carried out day to day functions of office like filing, letter typing.
 Report Writing and Nepali typing.

44 | P a g e
 Boundary and social survey, Map preparation, Forest resource inventory and data
analysis using excel.
 Inventory data entry of Marsyangdi Corridor 220 Kv Project in Ms-excel.
 Chhapan activity and log measurement.
 Participate to represent the medicinal plants information and uses to the local people in
the carnival held in Beshishahar, Lamjung.

6.2.2 Challenges

a. New working environment

Working in the official environment was a complete new experience for me. There were
challenges of learning and coping in the environment.

b. Time management
With internship and research for partial fulfillment of bachelor's degree going parallel, time
management sometimes became an issue.

6.3 Internship learning

Internship helped me to groom both personally and professionally. This four month period was
bumpy ride with lots of up and down. It helps me to improve practical skills in related field and to
identify and build on our strengths as well as improve on weaknesses. Some of the key lessons
that I learnt during my internship period are as follow;
Soft skills

Internship helped me to enhance my soft skills like time management, team work, decision
making and communication skills. It helped me to be more social and meet new people.

Organization exploration

Internship at Forest Directorate helped me to understand how government entity works. I also
learned about work ethics and how to be efficient in different situations.

45 | P a g e
REFERENCES
Adhikari, B. (2002). Community Forestry and Livelihoods. Journal of Forest and Livelihood
Vol, 2(July), 3–14.
http://www.forestaction.org/pdfs/journal_of_forest_and_livelihood/vol2_1/Household
characteristics _18_.pdf
Adhikari, S. (2019). Community forestry and livelihood linkages : A case of Kamalamai
community Community forestry and livelihood linkages : A case of Kamalamai community
forest , Dolakha , Nepal. October 2016, 0–7. https://doi.org/10.3126/njes.v4i0.22722
Cheng, S., G. C., D. B., Xu, Z., Bhandari, J., Wang, L., & Liu, X. (2016). Community forestry
and livelihood in Nepal: A review. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 26(1), 1–12.
G. C., D. B., Bhandari, J., Xu, Z., & Li, C. (2019). Contribution of community forestry in
poverty reduction: Case study of multiple community forests of Bajhang District, Nepal.
Journal of Resources and Ecology, 10(6), 632–640. https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-
764x.2019.06.008
Gentle, P. (2000). The flow and distribution of community forestry benefits : A case study from
THE FLOW AND DISTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY FORESTRY BENEFITS : A CASE
STUDY FROM PYUTHAN DISTRICT , NEPAL A thesis of the requirements for the Degree
of Master of Forestry Science in. November.
Global Alliance of Commuity Forestrey (GACF). (n.d.). Community Forestry and Rural
Livelihood. 13.
ICIMOD, Bhatia, A., & Karki, S. (1999). Participatory forest management: implications for
policy and human resources’ development in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas. v. 1: Workshop
proceedings.- v. 2: China.- v. 3: Eastern Himalayas.- v. 4: India.- v. 5: Nepal.- v. 6:
Pakistan. https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=XF2015046428
Joshi, B. (2015). Bachelor Degree in Forestry Researcher :
Nomos, E. (2004). Backgrounder : What is the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework ? 1. March,
1–6.
Persha, L. (2009). Community Forestry in Nepal: A policy innovation for local livelihoods and
food security. November 2009. http://www.forestaction.org/pdfs/Working_paper
CF_Nepal_IFRI.pdf
Pokharel, B. K., Stadtmuller, T., & Pfund, J.-L. (2005). From degradation to restoration: An

46 | P a g e
assessment of the enabling condi-tions for community forestry in Nepal. Intercooperation,
Swiss Foundation for Development and International, 1–10.
http://nepalpolicynet.com/images/documents/forest/research/An Assessment of the enabling
conditions for CF in Nepal.pdf
Shahi, N., Bhusal, P., Paudel, G., & Ndzifon, J. (2022). Forest - People Nexus in Changing
Livelihood Contexts : Evidence from Community Forests in Nepal Trees , Forests and
People Forest — People nexus in changing livelihood contexts : Evidence from community
forests in Nepal. Trees, Forests and People, 8(February), 100223.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2022.100223
Singh, S. (2020). Role of Community Forest on the Social and Financial Capital of Local People
Role of Community Forest on the Social and Financial Capital of Local People ( A Case
Study from Phalebhanjyang Community Forest , Dhading District .).
Springate-Baginski, O., & Dev, O. (2003). Community forest management in the middle hills of
Nepal: the changing context. Journal of Forest and …, 3(1), 5–20.
http://nrsp.org/database/documents/869.pdf
Thani, P., & Kandel, P. (2021). A review of community forestry contributions to livelihood assets
in Nepal and contemporary challenges. 2, 41–49.
Thoms, C. A. (2008). Community control of resources and the challenge of improving local
livelihoods: A critical examination of community forestry in Nepal. Geoforum, 39(3),
1452–1465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2008.01.006
Upreti, M. (2020). AN ASSESSMENT OF CONTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY AN
ASSESSMENT OF CONTRIBUTION OF CMMUNITY.

47 | P a g e
APPENDICES

1. Questionnaire
List of Data Collection Instruments

 Structured & semi-structured set of questionnaires.

Questionnaires
1. Questionnaire for household survey
Name of the interviewer:
Questionnaire code No:
Date:
Name of CFUG:
Rank of the users on the basis of wealth
a. Demographic Features
Name of the respondent:
Gender: M/F
Age:
Name of Municipality/Ward:
No of individual in HH:
A. Household Information

Age group No. Sex Education Occupation Remarks

(Yr.) Male Female Level
Below 15
15-45
Above 45
Occupation: Agriculture, Business, Service within Nepal, Service outside country, Student,
Wage labor
B. How much land do you currently own? (In Ropani)

Land type Area

Khet (Large productive agricultural land)
Bari (Medium productive agricultural land)
Kharbari (Poor productive agricultural land)
Other

C. Livestock numbers that you have:

1. Cattle [ ] 2. Buffalo [ ] 3. Goats [ ] 4. Others (Specify) [ ]

48 | P a g e
b. Social Capital

1. Are you/your household members of CFUGC? i. Yes ii. No

 If yes, please specify the position:
 If no, would you like to become a committee member?
i. Yes
ii. No
If no, why?
2. Do you participate in the FUG’s regular assembly? If yes, how often
i. Always ii. Most of the time iii. Sometime iv. Rarely
 What role would you play in the FUG meeting/assembly?

i. Discuss actively ii. Discuss most of the time iii. Speak some time only
iv. Speak sometime if I don’t like the decision v. Listen to others idea only
 If no, why?

3. Have your suggestions or concerns heard properly in the meeting? (what kind of things/issue
do you put forward?) i. Yes ii. No
 if yes has it been reflected in reality/practical? What issue have you raised?
 If not, why?

4. The degree of participatory decision making after CF formation is

i. Increased ii. Decreased iii.No change iv.Don’t know
5. What aspect did you add in the decision making of the FUG? Mention
i. Distribution of the forest products
ii. Change in the rule in the operational plan
iii. Forest management activities
iv. Use of FUG fund in different community development activities
v. Others specify

6. What do you think about the decision that has been made by FUGC?
i. All good ii. Good iii. Ok iv. Not good for all v. Worse
7. Are you a member in any other institution in your village? i. Yes ii. No
 If yes, specify the institution and your position?

8. Who takes the responsibility for the following tasks in your family?

49 | P a g e
Area of decision Decision maker
Male female both
Household task
Looking after children
Forest product collection
Household investment
To go for earning
Raising crops in the field
Going of women for outside works
Completed family size
Birth spacing

9. Did you feel any change in the role of decision-making power in your family after CF\
Programme? i. Yes ii. No
 If yes, please specify which activity of CF makes you so?
Do you think your social networks and affiliations has been improved after being
involved in CF? i. Yes ii. No
 if yes, no. of institutions that you have involved before or now
 if no? What is the hindering factors? How you can improve?

c. Financial Capital

1. What is the major source of income for your household?

i. Agriculture ii. Business iii. Service iv. Wage labour v. Remittance vi. Others (specify)

2. Do you know about the FUGs fund? i. Yes ii. No iii. Don’t know
 If yes, what is the approx. income of your CF?...........................
 Where are the CFUGs fund invest?
i. Infrastructure development ii. Community development iii. Forest protection

3. Do you know about the CF's income has an expenditure guideline? i. Yes ii. No
 if yes how much percentage of income is expenses income which topic?
i. Development, conservation and management of CF(25):
ii. Poor and disadvantages groups, dalits, aadibasi and janjati(35):
iii. For Community development:
iv.
4. Are you satisfied with the fund management of CFUG? i. Yes ii. No

5. What do you think how the CFUGs fund is managed ? i. Good ii. Medium iii. Worst

50 | P a g e
 do you see any necessity in fund management/expenses guideline of CF?
if yes…

6. Has your CFUG provided loan to users from CFUG fund? i. Yes ii. No
 If yes, how much amount for what type of activity and its time span.
 Have you taken any loan and for what purposes?

7. Do you think this loan or activitiy initiated from loan has improved your livelihood?
 if yes in what way?

8. Do you/your family member is involving with income generation activities?

Alternatively, any small-scale enterprises? i. Yes ii. No
If yes, what are the major activities? Any two
a). b).

5. How did you manage the expenditure for enterprises or IGAs?

i. Own savings ii. Bank loan iii. Saving fund of group iv. Loan from land lord v. Others

6. Do you know about IGAs that you and your community have been practicing? i. Yes ii.No
 If yes, please list out their names

7. Is poor benefiting from IGAs through the generation of income?

d. Perception of Users towards CF

How would you perceive the following statement?
Please indicate your agreement or disagreement with the following statement as (1) Strongly
agree (2) Agree (3) Neutral (4) Disagree (5) Strongly disagree
SN Statement St. Agree Neutral Disagree St.
Agree disagree
1 Fuel wood is available more than
before

2 Timber is available more than before

3 Views of all users is considered

during the preparation of constitution

4 Fair decision is taken regarding the

nomination of candidates for training,
workshops, study tours
5 Each members has an equal
opportunity to became elected in
committee members

51 | P a g e
e. Gender concern
1. Who is responsible for the forest products collection? How much time does it take?
Activities Men Women Time period Quantity
Grazing
Fuel wood
Grass/Fodder/Leaf litter
Timber / Pole
NTFPs
Others

2. Who decide/involve/responsible on the following Activities?

SN Activities Male Female Time
period
1 Collect water
2 Cook/ washing/ cleaning
3 Irrigate farm
4 Ploughing
5 Feed cattle
6 Child care
7 Seed sowing
8 Fertilizing
9 Harvesting
10 Marketing
11 Livestock care
12 Selling and buying of livestock
13 Consumption of agricultural products
14 Getting loan and investment
15 Social campaign
16 Training/workshop/meeting
17 Decision-making
18 VDC activities
19 Purchasing of household goods
20 Marriage of son and daughter
21 Service and business
22 Selling and buying of land
23 Others……….

3. Who involve/decide/responsible in the following forestry works? NF? / CF?

SN Forestry works Male Female Male Female Contribution in
(vol / payee)

52 | P a g e
1 Plantation
2 Nursery management
3 Pruning/ thinning
4 Felling
5 Choice of species.
6 Forest product distribution
7 Operational plan preparation
8 Others…….
9 Don't Know

4. Women’s participation is in CF (exist or not )……….. i. Yes ii. No

 if not why?
5. What is the state of women in CF management as compared to 10 yrs back?
i. Satisfactory ii. Nothing changed iii. good iv. excellent
6. Do women put their ideas in meetings? i. Yes ii. No
 If not, why?
7. Are women voices considered in every activity? i. Yes ii. No If not, why?
8. Is there equal participation of male and female in decision-making? i. Yes ii. No
 If no, who dominant?
9. Do you know in what gender equality activities the funds have been invested? If yes, in what
kind?
10. What are the gender equality and women's empowerment strategy and activities in CF
program?
11. Women role is essential for CF development? i. Yes ii. No iii. Don’t Know
12. What are the factors that affect women participation in CF activities?
i. cultural (shyness) ii. Workload iii. Male dominancy iv. Illiteracy v. No opportunity
vi. Others

CHECKLIST FOR FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

1. Views on forest condition
2. Access and control of forest products before and after CF
3. Management practices implemented in the CF
i. Plantation ii. Nursery iii. NTFP presence +collection
iv. Management and utilization of marginal and degraded land inside CF

4. Assess income and employment before and after CF

i. Income and its source ii. Expenditure area iii. Use of FUG fund for IGA and welfare of
Users

5. Assess benefit sharing and decision making system in CF

i. Equity-equality issues in forest products distribution ii. Leadership iii. Participation

6. Change in Users role due to CF

53 | P a g e
7. Contribution of CF for increasing the livelihood assets of Users.

8. Conflicts, problems and constraints to support users.

2. Internship Agreement

54 | P a g e
3. Photo plates

Photo 1: Cleanliness Program of Photo 2: Log Measurement

Indreni Community Forests

Photo 3: Training for instrument

use to CF user Photo 4: Medicinal Plant Stall

55 | P a g e
Photo 5: Ghad Gaddi

Photo 6, 7, 8: Boundary Survey and

Inventory and Household Survey

56 | P a g e