Hariyo Ban Program Framework for Strengthening Governance in Natural Resource Management In the Hariyo Ban Program, Good Governance is defined as the participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive approach that follows the rule of law which helps to assure that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most poor, vulnerable and socially excluded groups in society are heard in decision-making. This paper aims to share the Hariyo Ban Program approaches in strengthening governance of natural resource management (NRM) groups. This includes capacity building, policy engagement, collaboration and leveraging, development planning, mainstreaming, and scaling up of Hariyo Ban Program initiatives. This program is being implemented in two landscape areas - Terai Arc Landscape (TAL) and Chitwan Annapurna Landscape (CHAL) - by a consortium of four organisations WWF Nepal, CARE Nepal, Federation of Community Forestry Users, Nepal (FECOFUN) and National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC) with the support of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). 1. Background The Government of Nepal (GoN) has adopted a policy of good governance for the effective, equitable and efficient delivery of public goods and services (Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, 2010) in which good governance has been identified as one of the key strategies to promote accountability, transparency and a corruption-free environment in its services to all citizens, including those excluded from customary economic and service delivery systems. Government policies like the Good Governance (Management and Operation) Act, 2007; the Right to Information Act, 2007; the Public Procurement Act, 2007; the Local Self-Governance Act, 1998; the Civil Service Act, 1993; and the Corruption Alleviation Act, 1992; all focus on effective and efficient service delivery by government, the private sector, I/NGOs and civil society organizations. Nepal has made considerable progress in restoring and conserving its environment and forests through communitybased forest management regimes. GoN has formulated progressive, decentralized and people-centric policies to promote community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) and to delegate authority to communities to manage forest and water resources. However, the natural resource base suffers a number of threats including unplanned infrastructure development, loss of forest land due to encroachment, unsustainable use and illegal harvest of forest resources, poaching of wildlife, fire, and invasive species and overgrazing. Several of these issues persist due to inadequate environmental policies and regulations, as well as economic constraints faced by the increasing population. More importantly, poor NRM governance further exacerbates the situation in Nepal, as major challenges exist in community-based NRM practices such as insufficient transparency; low levels of accountability; elite domination in benefits sharing; inadequate inclusiveness in participation for decision-making; and inadequate sustainable livelihood options for forest dependent marginalized communities. 1 Poor citizens, particularly women and dalits, whose livelihoods depend heavily on natural resources, have traditionally been excluded from decision-making processes in NRM, and thus are also marginalized in benefit sharing. In addition, women and marginalized groups are often the most vulnerable to climate change, exacerbating their already precarious situation. 2 Climate governance is therefore becoming a major concern, and it demands a proactive and long-term strategic mindset from the state. Improved governance systems based on sound and equitable national policies not only offer NRM groups and their members the opportunity to engage, but also creates a conducive environment for the meaningful participation of the poor, vulnerable, women and other excluded and marginalized citizens. This, in turn, promotes fair and transparent processes for equitable benefit-sharing, effective management and utilization of natural resources. It also contributes to increasing the effectiveness of the service providers ability to meet the demands of the people. Realizing this the Hariyo Ban Program, from its inception, has been working with vulnerable communities as well as government authorities to mainstream good governance in NRM and climate change sector policies, plans and procedures. The Hariyo Ban Program s governance approach The Hariyo Ban Program s governance approach is built on learning from previous projects such as SAMARPAN 3 and SAGUN 4, as well as other NRM related programs. Good governance practices include: increasing public participation, accountability, transparency and predictability. 1 Kandel, K. R. and Kandel, B. R. (2004). Community forestry in Nepal: Achievements and challenges. Journal of Forest and Livelihood 4 (1) July 2004. 2 IPCC (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 3 SAMARPAN is Strengthened Role of Civil Society and Women in Democracy and Governance Program funded by USAID. 4 SAGUN is Strengthened Actions for Governance in Utilization of Natural Resources (SAGUN) Program funded by USAID.
In the Hariyo Ban Program, good governance is defined as the effective, participatory, transparent, equitable and accountable management of natural resources, guided by previously agreed procedures and principles to achieve the goal of sustainable natural resource management. 5 The governance framework of CARE 6 anticipates three domains of change as follows: 1. Poor, vulnerable and socially excluded people are empowered to know and act on their rights and represent their interests; 2. Those in power, such as governments, traditional leaders and the private sector, behave in ways that are more effective, responsible, responsive and accountable; and 3. There are linkages and convening spaces which enable effective and inclusive relations and negotiation between the two. The same governance framework has been adopted and adapted for the Hariyo Ban Program (Figure 1). Sustainable management of forest resources; and climate resilient ecosystem and community Domain 1 Marginalized citizens dependent on forest resources are empowered Domain 3 Spaces for negotiation between power holders/ duty bearer stated in Domain 2 and right holder stated in Domain 1 are expanded Domain 2 Public authorities under MoFSC, MoSTE, MoFALD, NRM groups, and local bodies are effective and accountable to marginalized citizens dependent on forest resources Figure 1- Governance framework (Adopted from A Governance Programming Framework for CARE) Domain-1: Marginalized citizens dependent on forest resources are empowered This domain primarily focuses on devising and testing of participatory tools to identify marginalized citizens who need to be empowered. It focuses on empowering marginalized citizens and socially excluded groups dependent on forest resources so that they are aware of their rights and responsibilities, and are able to undertake collective action to raise their concerns and ensure their stewardship in conservation and development. This domain also emphasizes that their demonstrative leadership is recognized by society, and that marginalized citizens participate meaningfully in decision making processes related to NRM. In the Hariyo Ban Program, this domain includes the poor, women, dalits, highly marginalized janajatis, climate vulnerable communities, and community-based natural resource management groups (such as Community Forest Users Groups, Buffer Zone Community Forest Users Groups, Sub-Watershed Management Committees, Conservation Area Management Committees, Leasehold Forestry Users Groups, Collaborative Forestry Users Groups, and their networks), as the target beneficiaries and impact groups. The Hariyo Ban Program works closely with these groups and helps them to understand governance related issues; then supports them to initiate processes of empowerment including Underlying Causes of Poverty and Vulnerability Assessment (UCPVA), social action and resource leveraging. 5 http://governance.care2share.wikispaces.net/what+is+governance%3f 6 http://governance.care2share.wikispaces.net/file/view/gpf%20main%20document%20final.pdf/256612310/gpf%20main%20document%20final.pdf
During 2013, a study carried out by the Hariyo Ban Program revealed that there is a low level of women s representation in decision making bodies in different natural resource management structures (Figure 2). 7 While some efforts have been made to this end, women in Nepal, especially in rural communities, are still far behind in terms of leading natural resource management groups. There are a number of reasons for this; chief among them is a disparity in access to, and control over resources both financial and natural. Added to this is the fact that women are offered fewer opportunities than men to enhance their knowledge, skills and capacity, leading to an even greater gap between women and men in the leadership of natural resource management. It is, therefore, necessary to explore the challenges faced by female leaders in the field of conservation. The leadership barriers faced by women need to be studied and strategic plans need to be developed to increase the meaningful leadership of women in conservation and climate change. Similarly this indicates a strong need to build the capacity of women so that their roles in decision making processes can be ensured. 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Figure 2- Leadership status of men and women in Natural resource management structures Domain-2: Public authorities under the Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation (MoFSC), Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment (MoSTE), Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD), NRM groups, and local bodies are effective and accountable to marginalized citizens dependent on forest resources This domain focuses on increasing the competency and mutual accountability of public authorities and powerholders. It anticipates that the relevant authorities and power holders recognize the rights, roles and responsibilities of communities in resource management and should thus support, strengthen, and create a participatory space for communities to engage in the natural resource management cycle. When such mechanisms are in place, decisions will be inclusive, and authorities will be accountable and responsive to the concerns, needs and rights of citizens. The Hariyo Ban Program s key stakeholders in the NRM sector include government ministries {such as the Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation (MoFSC), Ministry of Federal Affair and Local Development (MoFALD)}, district level line agencies such as the District Forest Office (DFO), District Soil Conservation Office (DSCO), District Agriculture Development Office (DADO), District Livestock Service Office (DLSO), Women and Children Development Office (WCDO), District Development Committee (DDC), Village Development Committees (VDCs), political party leaders, NRM groups, NRM-based federations and networks, the private sector, the media, elites, and social and religious leaders. Based on evidence and experience from the field, one of the roles of the Hariyo Ban Program consortium partners and other partner organizations is to influence and contribute to policy formulation and support policy implementation at the local level, bringing voices from the local level to shape national agendas while simultaneously supporting accountability of government representatives with regard to their policy commitments. Different policy dialogue opportunities have been facilitated by consortium partners to develop strategies and guidelines for enhancing governance. A policy group has been formed involving representatives from the ministries and departments, which ultimately helps to reflect the Hariyo Ban Program s policy learning in national policies, regulations and strategic documents. In addition, representation of marginalized communities, in particular forest dependent communities are ensured at all levels of project interventions. 7 Community Forest Users Groups, Conservation Areas and Buffer Zone figures extracted from study entitled as Community-based Natural Resource Management Institutions in Nepal: Why the future needs women conducted under Hariyo Ban Program, CARE Nepal.
Domain-3: Spaces for negotiation between power holders / duty bearer stated in Domain 2 and right holder stated in Domain 1 are expanded This domain focuses on creating and guaranteeing safe, inclusive and democratic spaces for marginalized citizens and power holders to interact. The interaction should provide opportunities for authorities to understand and hear the needs and demands of marginalized groups, and a fair and free environment for marginalized communities to present their concerns and demands. At the same time, concerned authorities will be able to use this opportunity to convey to the marginalized groups and individuals their expectations of them as responsible citizens. This in turn increases the commitment and sense of responsibility in both citizens and the authorities. The space created through this process ultimately contributes to developing pro-poor, gender equitable and socially inclusive policies and programs. A rapid assessment to review the status of gender equality and social inclusion and governance among 913 Community Forest Users Groups (CFUGs) across TAL and CHAL revealed that about 46% of the CFUGs were yet to renew their Community Forestry Operational Plans. For CFUGs, Participatory Governance Assessment (PGA), Participatory Well Being Ranking (PWBR) and Public Hearing and Public Auditing (PHPA) are mandatory provisions under the Community Forestry Development Guideline, 2065 but the assessment revealed that only 22% of the more than 900 CFUGs have conducted PGA, PHPA and PWBR and that only 10% of the CFUGs have equitable resource allocation. 8 WWF Nepal/Hariyo Ban Program/ Judy Oglethorpe Governance is a cross-cutting theme and is linked with all three thematic components of the Hariyo Ban Program, namely biodiversity conservation, sustainable landscape management and climate change adaptation. The other cross cutting themes are Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) and Livelihoods. In order to create the above framework (Figure 1) in a practical context, the program has also conceptualized a results chain framework (Figure 3), using methodology from WWF s Conservation Standards for Project and Program Management. 9 In this context, the Hariyo Ban Program envisions that empowered citizens, increased accountability of public authorities and power holders, along with the expansion of inclusive negotiated spaces will contribute to sustainable and GESI-responsive NRM, and climate resilient human and ecological communities. Strengthen internal governance of community groups responsible for ecosystem management Figure 3- Governance framework result chain 8 Rapid Governance and Representation Assessment of CFUGs, Hariyo Ban Program, WWF Nepal and FECOFUN, 2013 9 http://awsassets.panda.org/downloads/0_0_wwf_standards_overview_2012_10_19.pdf
The key parameters under each domain of change are illustrated in the following table: Domain 1 Domain 3 Domain 2 Dimensions of Change Dimensions of Change Dimensions of Change 1. Marginalized citizens dependent on forest resources are aware of their rights and responsibilities, exercise their own aspirations and capabilities, have the ability to control resources and decisions and have self-dignity. 2. Citizens participate in and organize collective actions mainly on sustainable and GESIresponsive forest management and climate change adaptation. 1. Institutionalized spaces (e.g. CSOs, NRM groups and their federations, and local bodies) are inclusive and effective. 2. Participatory tools and techniques (e.g. community score board, participatory governance assessment, public hearing and public auditing, gender responsive budget analysis, joint monitoring, etc.) are regularly practiced and institutionalized. 1. Effective implementation of progressive and transparent legislation, policy and budget processes (Increased capabilities to formulate and implement policies effectively, especially mainstreaming local planning process towards addressing threats, drivers and vulnerabilities). 2. Public authorities allocate and spend an adequate budget for policies and program that are responsive to marginalized citizens (the program and budget is allocated to address the needs and requirements of impact groups particularly from forest depended communities). 3. Citizens hold public authorities and other power holders accountable in addressing threats to biodiversity conservation and the adverse impacts of climate change. 4. Citizens influence public policy and promote linkages with government agencies on sustainable and GESIresponsive forest management and climate change adaptation. 5. Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) like FECOFUN, Community based Forestry Supporter s Network (COFSUN), Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN), Himalayan Grassroots Women s Natural Resource Management Association (HIMAWANTI), etc. are representatives of, and accountable to, marginalized citizens. 6. Alliances and coalitions are formed for progressive changes in issues pertinent to marginalized citizens. 3. General assemblies, periodic meetings, reviews and interfaces are conducted by representing impact groups. 4. Local level planning processes are strengthened by involving representatives of the marginalized and socially excluded communities. The agendas raised by the marginalized communities are addressed properly. 5. Decision making processes are inclusive to area, gender, caste and ethnicity; decisions are properly implemented and results are jointly monitored. 6. Issues are reviewed, analyzed and consolidated properly. Recognize people s power Response to genuine concern 3. Public authorities provide information on their functions, actions and decisions that is timely, accessible and relevant to impact populations (Public hearing and public auditing, periodic reviews with marginalized citizens and their group institutionalized, notice dissemination and comment feedback mechanisms strengthened). 4. Formal/informal and traditional institutions and authorities (e.g. political parties, trade unions, private sector, media, etc.) are inclusive and more accountable to marginalised citizens (Implementing accountability mechanisms and sharing information on their actions and decisions). 5. Marginalised citizens are aware of performance standards or mandates of service delivery agencies (Strengthening practice of Community Score Card, Gender Responsive Budget Analysis tools, VDC profile with desegregated data and indicator based monitoring and reporting institutionalized). 6. Marginalised citizens have improved access to and use of quality and appropriate public services from local to national authorities (Strengthened incentives and capacities to identify meet the needs, aspirations and demands of impact groups particularly from forest depended communities). 3. Monitoring mechanism The Hariyo Ban Program has adopted a three-tiered monitoring system participatory monitoring of activities by program beneficiaries; monitoring of progress, effectiveness and results by field offices; and output and outcome level monitoring by country offices. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is a part of good governance, with a feedback mechanism integrated at all levels of decision making. Although community forests are credited with bringing many benefits, there is evidence that many NRM groups are institutionally too weak to ensure good governance and equitable resource management. In order to build on and expand the successes and learning of the SAGUN experience in the program districts. In addition to implement the revised Community Forestry Development Guidelines (2009) which focus on improved governance of CFUGs and empowerment and capacity building of women, as well as indigenous, marginalized, and poor people to build awareness of policies and institutional mechanisms related to management, equitable benefit sharing and access to
natural resources; the program has outlined four activities in relation to CFUGs namely: participatory governance assessment (PGA), participatory well-being ranking (PWBR), public hearing and public auditing (PHPA) and equitable resource allocation as per guidelines (e.g. CFDG, 2009). In the case of other groups such as Conservation Area Management Committees, PGA is conducted as an initial step to prepare action plans for strengthening internal good governance, and monitored regularly for the desired outcomes. The M & E plan will be instrumental in operationalizing the results framework of the Hariyo Ban Program and measuring the impacts against set indicators and learning in governance. It should also be noted that increased governance will bring changes in the arena of (i) increased representation of marginalized groups in NRM groups and networks; (ii) reduced gender-based violence, and increased equitable benefit sharing; and (iii) negotiation space expanded and used effectively. 4. Key roles of Hariyo Ban Program consortium partners The comparative advantages of consortium partners are mobilized to strengthen governance in the working areas. WWF Nepal, as the prime partner, is responsible for support to the GoN for policy work (formulation, review and implementation of policies). FECOFUN with its strong base at the community level takes a leadership role in empowering marginalized citizens of CFUGs and district federations. It also takes the lead on advocacy on pertinent issues of governance from the community to national policy level. NTNC mainly contributes by strengthening governance practices among the citizens and community institutions of protected areas and develops linkages between communities inside and outside protected areas to reduce illegal trade and poaching. CARE Nepal builds on its previous learnings and experiences of social mobilization, institutions, networking, capacity-building, ensuring the participation of marginalized citizens, and gender equality. CARE Nepal will also support capacity building by identifying underlying causes of poor governance, and facilitate policy discourse/feedback at different levels (micro to meso to macro level). The experience and learning acquired by WWF Nepal and CARE Nepal in NRM governance from other countries and regions in this field is being assimilated and applied, taking into account Nepal s local contexts. 5. Participatory governance tools Underlying Causes of Poverty and Vulnerability Analysis (UCPVA): UCPVA aims to identify and understand the root causes of poverty and vulnerability among the impact groups. (Source: Transformational Social Mobilization: Facilitator s Manual CARE Nepal, 2070) http://www.carenepal.org/publication/_brigitta%20report.pdf Participatory Governance Assessment (PGA) Tool: PGA is a tool used to identify the status of good governance among community groups. Participants evaluate the extent to which prevalent decision making and management practices meet four governance pillars namely transparency, participation, accountability and predictability. http://www.wwfnepal.org/hariyobanprogram/hariyo_ban_program_publications/?209502/internal-governance-tool-3-participatory-governance- Assessment Public Hearing and Public Auditing (PHPA): PHPA is the process of sharing, assessing and auditing all financial transactions, decisions and the processes of financial expenses. http://www.wwfnepal.org/hariyobanprogram/hariyo_ban_program_publications/?209500/internal-governance-tool-1-public-hearing-and- Public-Auditing Participatory Well Being Ranking (PWBR): PWBR is a process by which a group of households categorize themselves by economic and social status. PWBR is conducted by Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs) with the assistance of local resource person who act as facilitator. http://www.wwfnepal.org/hariyobanprogram/hariyo_ban_program_publications/?209501/internal-governance-tool-2-participatory-well-being- Ranking Community Learning and Action Center (CLAC): CLACs are informal platforms where women and marginalized communities participate to discuss their issues and challenges. They identify major issues, and analyze the underlying causes of issues and prioritize them for action. Based on the discussions, they come up with collective plans to address their issues. http://awsassets.panda.org/downloads/annex_12_5_pamphlet community_learning_and_action_center.pdf
Community Score Board (CSB): CSB is a monitoring and evaluation tool that enables beneficiary community members to assess service providers and to rate their services/performance using a community defined grading system. It is an instrument to exactly measure public accountability at the local/facility level. http://carenepal.org/bulliten/_chsb.pdf Governance Programming Framework (GPF): CARE UK have developed Governance Programming Framework (GPF), it builds on and complements existing CARE frameworks such as the Unifying Framework for Poverty Eradication and Social Justice, and the Women s Empowerment Framework. Its primary purpose is to provide a framework that will assist CARE staff in conceptualizing and planning governance work. http://governance.care2share.wikispaces.net/file/view/gpf%20main%20document%20final.pdf/256612310/gpf%20main%20document%20 final.pdf Community Forest Program Development Guideline, 2066 (CFDPG): This guideline is prepared for all stakeholders involved in community forestry development in Nepal. This guideline should be followed when forming a community forest users group, and preparing, implementing and monitoring and evaluation of different activities undertaken to implement the constitution and forest operational plan. http://www.wwfnepal.org/media_room/publications/?212393/community-forest-development-program-guideline Gender Responsive Budgeting and Auditing (GRBA) Guideline: The Hariyo Ban Program s Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) mainstreaming strategy has a goal to engage and empower women and marginalized people in equitable benefit sharing through meaningful participation in the program s initiatives. The adoption of a Gender Responsive Budget framework in the program demonstrates our commitment towards empowering women and socially excluded groups for enabling them to meaningfully engage in conservation and climate change initiatives.
CARE Nepal/Hariyo Ban Program/ Manoj Pariyar The Hariyo Ban Program is named after the famous nepali saying Hariyo Ban Nepal ko Dhan (Healthy green forests are the wealth of Nepal). Thus the Program emphasizes the links between people and forests and is designed to benefit nature and people in Nepal. At the heart of Hariyo Ban Program lie three interwoven components biodiversity conservation, sustainable landscape management and climate change adaptation. These are supported by livelihoods, governance, and gender equality and social inclusion (GESI) as cross-cutting themes. A consortium of four nongovernmental organizations is implementing the Hariyo Ban Program with WWF Nepal leading the consortium alongside CARE Nepal, FECOFUN and NTNC. CARE Nepal Central Office 4/288, SAMATA Bhawan, Dhobighat, Lalitpur P.O. Box 1661, Lalitpur, NEPAL Tel:+977-1-5522800 Fax:+977-1-5521202 E-mail: carenepal@np.care.org Web: www.carenepal.org Disclaimer: This document is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this document are the responsibility of CARE Nepal and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.