How Nepal's Greening Miracle Left Its Dalit Communities Behind
In the rugged terrain of Nepal's Chure range, Nara Jung Praja, a Chepang leader, explains the delicate balance his community maintains with the forest: "Without bats, the Chiuri tree would not bloom and without Chiuri, the Chepangs would lose a key source of food, medicine, and income." 1 This intricate relationship represents generations of traditional knowledge that has sustained both forests and communities. Meanwhile, in the southern plains of Nepal known as the Terai Arc Landscape, Tharu women like Rebika Kumari Chaudhary practice frugal use of forest resources, controlling fires and carefully harvesting materials for their traditional basket weaving. 1
Over the past three decades, something remarkable has happened in Nepal: between 1992 and 2016, the country nearly doubled its forest cover, moving from 26 percent to 45 percent of its land area. 1 This astonishing reversal of deforestation trends has made Nepal a global showcase for successful forest management. The secret to this success? Community-based conservation that leveraged the traditional knowledge of indigenous groups like the Chepangs and Tharus. 1
But this green miracle conceals a troubling reality. While Nepal's forests flourished, the benefits have been unevenly distributed, with Dalit communities - the most marginalized group in Nepal's caste system - often left behind.
The 2018 National Social Inclusion Survey reveals that Dalit communities fall below the national average on all but two of the 15 development indicators, with reported discrimination significantly higher among these groups. 1 This article explores the complex intersection of ecological success and social justice in Nepal's forest management, examining how a environmental triumph created shadows of exclusion even as it brought green renewal.
Nepal's approach to forest conservation represents one of the world's most successful cases of participatory environmental governance. The model operates on a simple but revolutionary principle: local communities who depend on forests are best positioned to protect them.
Through formal community forest user groups, Nepalese communities manage nearly 2.3 million hectares of forest land, translating national policies into locally-appropriate practices.
Indigenous communities in Nepal possess generations of wisdom about sustainable resource use. The Chepang people's relationship with the Chiuri tree exemplifies this sophisticated understanding.
They utilize virtually every part of this tree: oil extracted from seeds becomes cooking ghee, pressed seeds turn into fertilizer, and honey formed in the tree is valued for medicinal properties. 1
Despite the participatory ethos of community forestry, structural inequalities rooted in Nepal's caste system have persisted within these institutions.
Dalits (formerly known as "untouchables") and other marginalized groups face multiple barriers to meaningful participation in forest governance and benefit sharing.
| Form of Exclusion | Manifestation | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Decision-making | Limited representation in leadership positions | Policies favoring elite interests |
| Resource Access | Inequitable benefit sharing | Perpetuation of economic disparities |
| Knowledge Recognition | Dismissal of traditional practices | Loss of valuable ecological knowledge |
| Program Participation | Barriers to joining new initiatives | Reduced capacity building opportunities |
The consequences of these exclusions are profound. As the National Social Inclusion Survey indicates, Dalits and many indigenous groups rank lower on development indicators, with limited access to resources, basic services, and decision-making opportunities. 1 This inequality becomes particularly acute when communities face climate-related impacts, as marginalized groups often live in remote areas with greater exposure to climate risks and greater dependence on natural resources. 1
A comprehensive 2024 study published in Ecology and Society provides crucial insights into the mechanisms of institutional change in Nepal's community forestry. Researchers employed a mixed-methods approach across Nepal's four physiographic regions, conducting 45 key informant interviews, 37 expert interviews, and 22 focus group discussions.
This extensive qualitative data was supplemented by reviews of 24 policy documents and 8 community forest management plans and reports, creating a rich dataset spanning five decades of forest management.
The study revealed that institutional changes in Nepal's forestry sector occurred through different mechanisms across regions. In the middle and high mountains, transformational changes driven by "critical junctures," "priming-framing," and "puzzling-learning" mechanisms led to significant policy shifts between 1976 and 2010. In contrast, the Terai region experienced more incremental changes through "negative/positive feedback" and "patching-up" approaches.
| Time Period | Primary Change Mechanisms | Key Drivers | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1976-2010 | Critical junctures, priming-framing, puzzling-learning | National policy shifts, international influence | Transformation from state-oriented to community-based management |
| Post-2010 | Priming-framing, negative/positive feedback, transposition | Global climate agendas (REDD+), economic growth | (De)incremental changes aligning with global priorities |
After 2010, the research identified "(de)incremental changes" linked to global agendas like REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), with "priming-framing," "negative/positive feedback," and "transposition" emerging as key mechanisms of institutional change. Importantly, the study found that exogenous institutions (externally imposed rules) produced mixed socioeconomic outcomes, while endogenous institutions (locally-developed rules) consistently led to positive outcomes, highlighting their importance in sustainable forest management.
The regional variations in institutional change mechanisms and outcomes underscore the importance of context-sensitive approaches to forest governance. What works in the hill regions may not be appropriate for the Terai plains, suggesting that decentralized, adaptive institutions yield better results than one-size-fits-all policies.
Studying the complex interplay between forest ecology and social systems requires diverse methodologies and interdisciplinary approaches. Researchers in this field employ both quantitative and qualitative methods to capture the full dimension of forest-community relationships.
Tools like GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and satellite imagery enable scientists to track deforestation and regeneration patterns across Nepal's challenging terrain. 6
Statistical analysis, particularly using programming languages like R, helps researchers identify correlations between social factors and ecological outcomes. 6
| Resource Type | Specific Tools/Resources | Application in Research |
|---|---|---|
| Technical Skills | R programming, GIS software, Statistical analysis | Data analysis, spatial mapping, identifying correlations |
| Field Techniques | Species identification, Survey methodologies, Ecological monitoring | Biodiversity assessment, resource use tracking, impact evaluation |
| Social Research Methods | Interviews, Focus groups, Participant observation, Institutional analysis | Understanding community perspectives, power dynamics, governance |
| Knowledge Sources | Traditional ecological knowledge, Scientific literature, Policy documents | Integrating local and scientific knowledge, policy analysis |
For those interested in developing skills in this field, resources like Data Camp for R programming, the Field Studies Council for species identification, and various textbooks on remote sensing and spatial analysis provide essential foundations. 6 Importantly, effective research in this area requires cultural competence and ethical approaches to working with marginalized communities, ensuring that research processes themselves don't perpetuate patterns of exclusion.
Nepal stands at a critical crossroads in its conservation journey. The country has demonstrated remarkable success in reversing deforestation through community-based approaches, offering valuable lessons for other nations struggling with forest loss. 1 Yet this achievement is tempered by the persistent exclusion of Dalits and other marginalized groups from the full benefits of forest management. 1
The challenge ahead lies in building on Nepal's ecological successes while addressing its social shortcomings. This will require deliberate efforts to ensure equitable participation in decision-making, fair distribution of benefits, and recognition of the traditional knowledge held by all communities, including Dalits.
Programs like the Dedicated Grant Mechanism (DGM) and Enabling Access to Benefit while Lowering Emissions (EnABLE) represent steps in this direction, specifically targeting capacity-building among marginalized groups. 1
As Nepal continues to confront climate change impacts, which disproportionately affect those already marginalized 1 , the integration of social justice with ecological management becomes increasingly urgent.
The future of Nepal's forests may depend not only on protecting trees but on nurturing a more inclusive conservation ethos that honors the dignity and rights of all people who call the forest's edge their home.
The story of Nepal's forests reminds us that true sustainability rests on three interdependent pillars: ecological integrity, economic benefits, and social equity. As we work to protect the world's forests, we must ensure that our green victories don't come shaded with the shadows of exclusion.