Key Issues
Though the LF program has made significant contribution in addressing the livelihood concerns of poor groups, as the program expands there has been increasing debate over its effectiveness. Evaluation of the program has highlighted that LF has reduced poverty in those areas, which have access to markets, line agencies and other linkages (IFAD, 2003). In remoter hill areas households have not seen much change in their income levels. In addition, the issue of cost-effectiveness, elite dominance, security of tenure etc have been highlighted as areas where there is need for critical evaluation of the approach (Thoms et al, 2003).
In the context of forest-based income generation activities, both LF and CF are now placing greater emphasis of NTFP based opportunities. Particular emphasis is being given to medicinal plants, which according to Olsen (1998) provides an annual income of about US$ 11-13 million to the collectors i.e. approximately 470,000 households (representing some 2.6 million people). The income contribution from medicinal plants ranges from 8 to 25% of household’s annual income. The interest in NTFP in Nepal has increased tremendously in the past 10 years, however the evidence for benefits of development of the sector reaching the rural poor is not clear. As Larsen et al (2000) point out that present policy formulation, implementation and field reality of the NTFP trade in Nepal reflects power structures and domination by certain stakeholders and interests. Pandit and Thapa (2004), argue for the role of external support from processing companies to help local communities in benefiting from NTFPs trade.
Income opportunities from timber at present have mainly been realized under the CF. However, such benefits do not accrue to poor households. The timber and poles are usually distributed within the forest user group through auction or tender (i.e. the highest bidder gets the wood). The price is usually lower than the market price; however, the committee members usually try not to let the price go too low to avoid having many bidders for a limited quantity of wood. Thus only certain members of the forest user groups can afford it (Malla, 2000).
In the area of social justice and empowerment, both CF and LF approaches, have stimulated changes in social relations between different groups of people, which has impacted on social inclusion and exclusion, and to some extent has provided for negotiation power to the poor and reduced gender discrimination. However, in many cases major control at the local level still lies with the village élite, and only patchy elements of social justice accrue to the poor and marginalized (Baral and Thapa, 2003; Timsina, 2003).