7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
1/350
ii
INTEGRATED WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT
Studies and Experiences from Asia
Edited by
Michael Zoebisch, Khin Mar Cho, San Hein and Runia Mowla
Language and Production Editor
Robin N. Leslie
On-line eBook
All parts of this book may be downloaded for personal and scientific use.
Produced and published with funding from Danida Danish International
Development Assistance under Programme Support to the Integrated
Watershed Development and Management Area of Study at the Asian Institute
of Technology
Published by
Asian Institute of Technology AIT
P.O.Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand
www.ait.ac.th
Asian Institute of Technology
All rights reserved
August 2005
http://www.ait.ac.th/http://www.ait.ac.th/7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
2/350
iii
CONTENTS
Preface ................................................................................................................... vii
1. Institutions and Rural Development
Community Development Groups and Watershed Management Activities
in Dhading District, Nepal .............................................................................. 1Arjun Kumar Thapa
Institutional Analysis of Watersheds With and Without External Assistancein the Hills of Nepal .................................................................................... 17
Shrutidhar Tripathi
Community Development Groups and Farm Conservation in Chhabdi Watershed, Nepal 39
Gehendra Keshari Upadhyaya
Institutional Coordination for Watershed Management in Dhading District, Nepal ......... 57Puspa Ram Thapa
Linkages among Land, Water and Forest Resources and Their Institutional Dynamismin Chitwan District, Nepal .................................................................................. 75
Kanchan Thapa
Differentiating Active and Passive User Groups for Watershed Management
in the Western Hills of Nepal .......................................................................... 95Basan Shrestha
Participation of Disadvantaged People in Watershed Management
in Makawanpur District, Nepal .......................................................................... 113
Dandi Ram Bishwakarma
Integrated Natural Resource Conservation: Peoples Perceptions and Participationin Nepal ......................................................................................................... 131
Shiva Kumar Wagle
Forest Land-use Dynamics and Community-based Institutions in a Mountain Watershedin Nepal: Implications for Forest Governance and Management. ........................ 151Ambika Prasad Gautam
Institutional Development for Community-based Natural Resource Managementin Upland Areas of Thailand ............................................................................. 197
Nitaya Kijtewachakul
http://08-syn2-arjunkumarthapa.pdf/http://09-syn2-tripat.pdf/http://16-syn2-pusparamthapa.pdf/http://18-syn2-kanchathapa.pdf/http://21-syn2-basanshrestha.pdf/http://23-syn2-dandir.pdf/http://42-syn2-shivak.pdf/http://42-syn2-shivak.pdf/http://phd02-syn2-gau.pdf/http://phd02-syn2-gau.pdf/http://phd03-syn01-nitaya.pdf/http://phd03-syn01-nitaya.pdf/http://phd03-syn01-nitaya.pdf/http://phd02-syn2-gau.pdf/http://42-syn2-shivak.pdf/http://23-syn2-dandir.pdf/http://21-syn2-basanshrestha.pdf/http://18-syn2-kanchathapa.pdf/http://16-syn2-pusparamthapa.pdf/http://13-syn2-gehandra%20keshari%20upadhyaya.pdf/http://09-syn2-tripat.pdf/http://08-syn2-arjunkumarthapa.pdf/7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
3/350
iv
2. Managing Forest Resources
Impact of Community Forestry in the Middle Hills of Nepal:A Case Study of Tinau Watershed .................................................................... 219Vijay Singh Shrestha
The Impacts of a Community Forestry Project in a Northwest Watershed of Cambodia 245Chan Danith
Institutionalizing Forest User Groups Via Community Forestry in Tanahun District, Nepal 263
Rameshwar Pandit
Evaluation of the Initial Results of Natural Forest Allocation to Thuy Yen Thuong Village,
Central Vietnam ................................................................................................ 281Ngo Tri Dung
Prospects for Institutional Sustainability in Community Forestry in Nepal ................... 299Narendra Prasad Shah
Community Forestry and Its Impact on Watershed Condition and Productivity in Nepal 313
Krishna Prasad Ghimire
Prospects for Commercial Production of Non-timber Forest Products in Nepal .......... 331
Shree Bhagwan Prasad Gupta
Participation in Natural Forest Resource Management in Pursat Province, Cambodia ... 351Ouk Kunka
Market Analysis of Major Products from Community-managed Forestsin the Foothill Watersheds of Nepal ................................................................ 371
Bhim Nath Acharya
Capacity Assessment of the Development Planning Process for Community Forestry
in Nepal ........................................................................................................... 391Bhoj Raj Khanal
Prospects for Promoting Non-timber Forest Products in the Mountains of Nepal ....... 413Bishnu Hari Pandit
3. Water Resources Management
Local Irrigation Institutions in Changing Watershed Conditions:
A Study of Jhikhu Khola Watershed ................................................................. 425Kanchana Upadhyay
Performance Indicators for Irrigation Management in Indonesia ................................. 445
Murtiningrum
http://06-syn2-vijays.pdf/http://06-syn2-vijays.pdf/http://17-syn2-r%20pand.pdf/http://19-syn2-ngotri.pdf/http://19-syn2-ngotri.pdf/http://32-syn2-np_sha.pdf/http://41-syn2-gupta.pdf/http://43-syn2-oukkun.pdf/http://45-syn2-bhimn.pdf/http://46-syn2-bhojra.pdf/http://46-syn2-bhojra.pdf/http://46-syn2-bhojra.pdf/http://phd01-syn01-pandit.pdf/http://01-syn2-kanchana.pdf/http://01-syn2-kanchana.pdf/http://14-syn2-murtin.pdf/http://14-syn2-murtin.pdf/http://01-syn2-kanchana.pdf/http://phd01-syn01-pandit.pdf/http://46-syn2-bhojra.pdf/http://45-syn2-bhimn.pdf/http://43-syn2-oukkun.pdf/http://41-syn2-gupta.pdf/http://36-syn2-kp_ghi.pdf/http://32-syn2-np_sha.pdf/http://19-syn2-ngotri.pdf/http://17-syn2-r%20pand.pdf/http://15-syn2-%20chan%20.pdf/http://06-syn2-vijays.pdf/7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
4/350
v
Strengthening Water User Communities to Improve Irrigation Management in Cambodia 459
Keang Ngy
Flood Control and WaterResource Management of the Day River Basin, Red River Delta,Vietnam ................................................................................................. 477
Ngo Van Sinh
Water Demand Forecast and Management Modelling in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal ...... 497
Pratistha Pradhan
Assessment of Groundwater Potential for Irrigation in Bangladesh ............................. 515
Shahriar Md. Wahid
Application of the AnnAGNPS Model for Watershed Quality Assessmentin the Siwalik Hills of Nepal ............................................................................... 531
Sangam Shrestha
Water Balance Analysis in Ea Knir Catchment, Daklak, Vietnam ............................... 557
Tran Thi Trieu
Farmers Participation in Irrigation Management in Vietnam ....... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 581
Pham Phu Ngoc
4. Understanding Watershed and Land-use Dynamics
Land-use Adjustment Based on Watershed Classification Using Remote Sensing and GIS 601Aye Thiha
Land Suitability Assessment and Participatory Land-use Planning and Management
in a Microwatershed of Orissa, India ............................................................... 615
Sharmistha Swain
Determinants of Soil Erosion in Tropical Steeplands: A Case Study of Kim NoiSub-watershed, Vietnam .................................................................................. 637
Le Thi Thu Huong
Impact of the Land Allocation Programme on Land Use and Land Management in Laos 657
Phonesane Vilaymeng
GIS-assisted Erosion Risk Assessment in the Chittagong Hill Tract, Bangladesh ........... 677
Md. Moqbul Hossain
Gender Analysis for Land Management and Conservation in Central Vietnam ............. 703Tran Thi Hai
Development of a Location-specific Soil Resistance to Erosion (SRE) Index:
A Case Study from Northeast Thailand ........................................................... 719Binaya R. Shivakoti
http://24-syn2-k_ngy.pdf/http://26-syn2-nv_sin.pdf/http://26-syn2-nv_sin.pdf/http://27-syn2-pratisthapradhan.pdf/http://28-syn2-sm_wah.pdf/http://37-syn2-s_shre.pdf/http://37-syn2-s_shre.pdf/http://38-syn2-tt_tri.pdf/http://44-syn2-phamng.pdf/http://03-syn2-sharmistha%20.pdf/http://03-syn2-sharmistha%20.pdf/http://12-syn2-lethithuhuong.pdf/http://12-syn2-lethithuhuong.pdf/http://20-syn2-phonesvilaymeng.pdf/http://25-syn2-mm_hos.pdf/http://33-syn2-tt_hai.pdf/http://34-syn-2-binaya_s.pdf/http://34-syn-2-binaya_s.pdf/http://34-syn-2-binaya_s.pdf/http://33-syn2-tt_hai.pdf/http://25-syn2-mm_hos.pdf/http://20-syn2-phonesvilaymeng.pdf/http://12-syn2-lethithuhuong.pdf/http://03-syn2-sharmistha%20.pdf/http://02-syn2-ayethiha.pdf/http://44-syn2-phamng.pdf/http://38-syn2-tt_tri.pdf/http://37-syn2-s_shre.pdf/http://28-syn2-sm_wah.pdf/http://27-syn2-pratisthapradhan.pdf/http://26-syn2-nv_sin.pdf/http://24-syn2-k_ngy.pdf/7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
5/350
vi
Determination of a Location-specific Soil Hydraulic Quality (SHQ) Index:
A Case Study from Northeast Thailand ............................................................. 739
Mohammad Gausul Azam
Dynamics of the Physico-Chemical Erodibility Factors of Soil under Different
Management Scenarios in the Watersheds of Chiang Mai, Thailand ................... 761
Assefa Gizaw Meka
Land-use Changes and Their Driving Forces in Northeastern Thailand ..................... 777Khin Mar Cho
Factors Influencing Land-use Change in Areas with Shifting Cultivation in Bangladesh 797Golam Rasul
5. Integrated Land Management
The Sustainability of Traditional and Modern Agricultural Land Use in Vietnam .......... 813
Nguyen Dinh Thi
Farmers Approaches to Soil-fertility Management in the Hills of Nepal ................... 835
Basu Dev Regmi
Farming Systems in Northeastern Thailand: Characterization and Implicationsfor Sustainability ........................................................................................... 855
Md. Mainul Hasan
Community-based Fishery Management in Battambang Province, Cambodia ............... 867
Nom Sophearith.
Women in Land Management and Conservation: A Case Study from the Middle Hills
of Nepal .......................................................................................................... 885Shabnam Shivakoti Aryal
Traditional Cottage Industry Development in the Upper Andhikhola Watershed, Nepal:
Problems and Prospects .................................................................................. 911
Megh Bahadur Nepali
Effects of Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Natural Resource Managementin Lao PDR ...................................................................................................... 929
Liengsone Somphathay
Contribution of Agroforestry to Livelihoods in Bara and Rautahat Districts, Nepal ....... 937
Lal Bahadur Prasad Kurmi
Impacts of the Upland Conversion Project in the Yangtze River Watershed on Farmers
Livelihoods ...................................................................................................... 945
Shao Wen
http://35-syn2-mg_a.pdf/http://35-syn2-mg_a.pdf/http://40-syn2-ag_meka.pdf/http://40-syn2-ag_meka.pdf/http://phd04-syn2-khi.pdf/http://phd05-syn01-ra.pdf/http://04-syn2-nguyen.pdf/http://05-syn2-basude.pdf/http://07-syn2-mainulhasan.pdf/http://07-syn2-mainulhasan.pdf/http://10-syn2-nomsopearith.pdf/http://11-syn2-sabnam.pdf/http://11-syn2-sabnam.pdf/http://11-syn2-sabnam.pdf/http://22-syn2-meghbahadur.pdf/http://22-syn2-meghbahadur.pdf/http://29-syn2-l_somp.pdf/http://29-syn2-l_somp.pdf/http://29-syn2-l_somp.pdf/http://30-syn2-lbp_ku.pdf/http://31-syn2-shao_w.pdf/http://31-syn2-shao_w.pdf/http://30-syn2-lbp_ku.pdf/http://29-syn2-l_somp.pdf/http://22-syn2-meghbahadur.pdf/http://11-syn2-sabnam.pdf/http://10-syn2-nomsopearith.pdf/http://07-syn2-mainulhasan.pdf/http://05-syn2-basude.pdf/http://04-syn2-nguyen.pdf/http://phd05-syn01-ra.pdf/http://phd04-syn2-khi.pdf/http://40-syn2-ag_meka.pdf/http://35-syn2-mg_a.pdf/7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
6/350
vii
Preface
Integrated watershed management is an effective means for the conservation and developmentof land and water resources. As an interdisciplinary approach, it integrates the socio-cultural and
economic as well as the biophysical and technological aspects of development. An over-riding concern
of integrated watershed development is the improvement of the livelihoods of local communities on asustainable basis. This requires balancing their economic needs and expectations with environmental
concerns so as to avert degradation of the natural resource base, in particular soil and water components.
Governments and development institutions are increasingly recognizing that full community
participation is essential for sustainable watershed development. With growing local participation,indigenous knowledge is now significantly influencing the planning, design, and implementation of
watershed development programmes. Long-term changes and development are more likely to be
adopted if communities have a say in the decision-making process. Sustainability also increases iflocal resources are more efficiently utilized and the use of or need for external inputs is minimized.
This book has been published in electronic format to target the vast audience that the world wide
web serves. It highlights different aspects of integrated watershed development for resource-poorsmallholders in Asia. The papers are syntheses of research projects, which were undertaken by
students of the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) in Bangkok between 2000 and 2004.
The contents provide an overview of a broad spectrum of current issues of significance and
concern for rural development in the higher altitudes of Asia. The studies exclusively deal with small-scale and community-level watershed development. The overall focus is on the peoples perspectives
of development and their roles and options in this process. Very different scenarios of typical smallholdermountain farming and forest-user communities are described and analysed from their socio-economic
and biophysical perspectives. Constraints to and options for development are discussed.
The book is structured into five thematic sections, which cover the institutional, socio-economic,
and biophysical aspects of watershed management.
1. Institutions and rural developmentexplores the roles of community-based institutions and
local watershed management.
2. Managing forest resourcesfocuses on different models of forest utilization, with emphasison community-forestry experiences from Cambodia, Nepal, and Vietnam.
3. Water resources managementdiscusses water use and water allocation for community-
managed small-scale irrigation schemes.
4. Understanding watershed and land-use dynamicsintroduces approaches for the evaluation
of watershed resources, the driving forces for land-use change, and the effects of land use onland quality.
5. Integrated land management gives examples of different watershed-managementapproaches and their effects on the livelihoods of local communities.
The book contributes to the wider discussion on people-centred and people-initiated integrated
development. It demonstrates that resource exploitation and the well being of the people are intrinsically
related. The contents reveal that sustainable development is not possible without the conservation ofnatural resources.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
7/350
viii
Because of its broad scope and the wide range of original source material, this book is also a
reference manual on current issues and trends for researchers and development practitioners who
are concerned with participatory approaches in small-scale community-level watershed development,particularly in Asia.
The editors
The Integrated Watershed Management Programme at AIT
Since 2000, the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) has been implementing the interdisciplinarypostgraduate degree programmeIntegrated Watershed Development and Management (IWDM).
The programme was developed in cooperation with the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University
(KVL), Denmark, and DHI Water and Environment, Denmark, and has been funded by the DanishInternational Development Assistance (Danida).
The programme has adopted an interdisciplinary and integrated approach to education, research,
and development, combining on-campus with outreach activities aiming at enhancing education and
action-oriented research in the region.
The main disciplines and fields of studies contributing to the programme are regional and ruraldevelopment planning, agricultural systems, natural resources management, and water resources
management. Courses are offered at Master and PhD levels. Since 2000, more than 50 students havegraduated and are now disseminating the knowledge they have acquired throughout Asia.
The editors can be contacted via e-mail at:
Michael Zoebisch:[email protected]
Khin Mar Cho:[email protected]
San Hein:[email protected]
Runia Mowla:[email protected]
Robin N. Leslie, language and production editor: [email protected]
mailto:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]:%[email protected]7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
8/350
1
Integrated Watershed Management: Studies and Experiences from Asia
Edited by Michael Zoebisch, Khin Mar Cho, San Hein & Runia Mowla. AIT, Bangkok, 2005
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GROUPS AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENTACTIVITIES IN DHADING DISTRICT, NEPAL
Arjun Kumar Thapa1
Introduction
Nepal is situated in the central Himalayas and has several watersheds, which are drained through
three major river systems: the Sapta Koshi in the east, the Karnali in the west, and the Sapta Gandaki
in the middle. Of the total watershed area of the country, 0.4, 1.5, and 11.7 percent of the watershedsare in very poor, poor, and fair condition respectively. Land and water are the major natural resources
available in Nepal; more than 90 percent of the population depends on these resources for theirlivelihoods. The slopes of upland areas, which were once covered with forests and vegetation, have
been heavily degraded and converted to agricultural land. Soil erosion from these areas has not onlyreduced productivity, but also caused flooding, pollution, and loss of life and property downstream. A
recent estimate of such soil loss is 271 million m3/year. A typical hill watershed contributes total
sediment of 21 t/ha/year between 1-2 mm of soil depthr per year (APROSC, 1997).
The Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management (DSCWM) under the Ministryof Forest and Soil Conservation (MFSC), is mandated to conserve and manage watersheds using a
community-based approach with the broad objective of raising the income of rural families by
contributing to improvement of the ecological conditions of the watersheds. A major effort by theDSCWM over the last two decades has been themobilization of local people through the formation of
Community Development Groups (CDGs) and involvement of members in all stages of watershedmanagement activities. In 1996, HMG/DSCWM/DANIDA launched a pilot project to establish CDGs
as non-governmental organizations; as such, the strengthening of local institutions would lead to thesustainable use of scarce and dwindling natural resources in the watershed. The CDGs have carried
out various watershed management activities with the assistance of the District Soil Conservation
Office (DSCO) in the study area.
In the past DSCO implemented watershed management activities according to its policies andstrategies; these were mainly based on annual physical targets rather than programme sustainability.
According to Karki and Sharma (1999), the past approach to watershed management consisted of
top-down planning, implementation, and monitoring of watershed management activities. Targets werefixed based on the budget available and the programme was entirely guided by the government.
Finally programme personnel abandoned the users once programme support was withdrawn. Bogati,(1999) indicated that the institutional aspect, which plays a vital role not only for effective implementation
of programme activities but also for the sustainability of development activities, has been ignored.
Development activities frequently fail in the long run due to the lack of local viable institutions that areable to carry out both management and maintenance.
1
MSc. Thesis (Ref. No. NR-01-08), Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand. August 2001.Examination Committee - Dr. Ganesh P. Shivakoti (Chair), Dr.Gopal Bahadur Thapa, Dr. Michael A. Zoebisch
http://covercontents.pdf/http://covercontents.pdf/http://covercontents.pdf/7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
9/350
2
Therefore, there is a need to study organizational performance and its sustainability, as well as
factors influencing performance in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability. So, the overall
objective of the study is to analyse the performance and organizational sustainability of selectedCDGs in the study area.
The study area
Adam Khola sub-watershed was selected for the study; it comes under the jurisdiction of two village
development committees, Kumpur and Kelleri (Figure 1) of Dhading District. Geographically the arealies between 27 47 and 27 50 latitude and 84 50 and 84 57 longitude with physical coverage of 1
907.8 ha (Hansen et al., 1995). The climate is mostly sub-tropical humid and warm temperate humid.
As the study area is in the Middle Mountain region of the country, hills and mountains dominate mostof the topography. The northern part of the study area has steeper gradients than the southern side.
There is also some small flat land area with gentle slopes to the northeast. The total forest area in thewatershed is 365.4 ha which is equivalent to 19.2 percent of the total study area. The types of
vegetation depend on slope gradient and other aspects.
Figure 1. The study area in Dhading District
The study area comprises agricultural land, forest land, shrubland, and grazing land. According to
Hansen et al. (1995), 36.2 percent (690.5 ha) of the watershed area is covered by irrigated land and
18.2 percent (347.8 ha) by non-irrigated land. Similarly 19.2 percent (365.4 ha) of the total area isoccupied by forest land, 16.2 percent (310 ha) by shrubland, and 10.2 percent (194.1 ha) by grazing
land. The condition of the sub-watershed is poor, mainly due to deforestation, overgrazing, cultivationon marginal land, stream bank cutting, gullies, and landslides. Occurrences of both natural and human-
induced erosion have been reported (Hansen et al., 1995).
There are 16 CDGs comprising 666 households within the study area. Among the 16 CDGs, four
groups, namely Amelichap, Chotetar, Janachetana, and Bungeshwori were selected using the followingcriteria: high demand by the local people; types and numbers of activities accomplished; accessibility
to the road and market facilities; and the number of households included in the organization. The
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
10/350
3
Amelichap and Janachetana groups were considered as accessible areas with higher numbers of
households (AAHNH). The Bungeshwori and Chotetar groups were considered as areas difficult to
access with lower numbers of households (ADALNH).DSCO/DANIDA has been assisting CDG watershed management since1996. The CDGs are
important local institutions for the welfare of the community and continuity of watershed managementactivities in the future. DANIDA has also supported different DSCOs that assist CDGs with watershed
management activities.
Demography of the study area
Family size has been correlated with labour contribution (Adhikari, 1996). Relatively large household
size means relatively more labour for farming. Therefore it was assumed that the rate of participation
differs among the family size. Based on the number of individuals in the households, Shrestha (1991)
has classified the household size into three different groups: Small = (1-4), Medium = (5-7), and Large= (> 8). Based on this classification the sampled households were categorized accordingly. Most ofthe families fall into the medium category.
The general assumption is that people of working age can contribute relatively more than peopleof non-working age. People of working age are more aware of development activities and their
potential contribution for development activities is higher. Therefore, the respondents age is an importantdeterminant of participation as it affects labour contribution and involvement in decision making
(Adhikari, 1996).
The law prohibits employment in any activity below the age of 16 (Paudel, 2000). However, in
practice, farming households use their children, even as young as 10, to collect fodder and fuelwood;
fetch water; carry manure to the farmyard; shepherd livestock; or look after their siblings while theparents conduct farming activities.
The age of the respondents ranges from 17 to 75 years. Most of the respondents interviewed in
each of the CDGs belonged to the economically active group (about half of the respondents wereyoung and adult). This group formed about 90 percent of the available human resources in each CDG.
In most cases the average age of the respondents was around 41 years.
There is a strong social caste system in Nepal. The ethnic groups prevalent in the study area are:
Brahman, Chettri, Gurung, Kami, Damai, Sarki, Magar, and Newar. Based on ethnic composition,Janachetana CDG is a heterogeneous community whereas Bungeshwori comprises three-fourths of
the Magar community. Of the total households sampled in Amelichap, nearly two-thirds of the communityis Brahman; this applies to Chotetar also. The Gurung community is the least prevalent comprising
only 3 percent of the sampled households in Janachetana CDG.
Ninety-five percent of the respondents are subsistence farmers who have fragmented parcels of
land averaging 1 ha. With no alternative off-farm activities, farming is the only option. Only a negligiblepercentage of the respondents are engaged in services and business. It is obvious that sources of
financial income for the local people are very scarce. Some family members in Bungeshwori CDG
work elsewhere.
Household earnings are a significant determinant of socio-economic status. Respondents wereasked about their household income from different sources. The mean annual income of Bungeswori
CDG was relatively higher, as household members work in services. Farmland is the most importantasset and a strong indicator for determining the socio-economic status of the households. The farmland
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
11/350
4
is divided into two types:Bari land (non-irrigated) andKhet land (irrigated). In the study area, most of
the farmers have rain-fed farmland.
Performance of Community Development Groups
The CDGs devise a community development plan that is supposed to reflect development perspectives
as perceived by the community, addressing natural resource management and other developmentneeds. The plan is the basis for approaching different line agencies for support. With technical assistance
from DSCO, CDGs directly implement programme activities via peoples participation.
Fundamentally, the community development committee (CDC) is responsible for coordinationamong CDG members and concerned offices for managing and accomplishing programme activities.
In this regard the performance of the CDGs was studied for conflict resolution, information sharing,
satisfaction derived from programme activity, benefit sharing, decision making, peoples participation,
and transparency. Efficiency, work accomplished according to the plan and available resources, technicalsoundness of the accomplished work, resource utilization, and use of cost-effective methods wereconsidered also.
Performance of the CDGs in the Water Source Protection Programme
Water sources are springs and kuwas (small irrigation ponds). Water source protection refers tovegetative and structural erosion control measures applied in the source and its catchments and all
distribution systems. The objective of this programme is to improve the quality and regime of water
through conservation of soil and water. Preventive as well as the rehabilitative measures have beentaken to avoid possible water-induced damage by integrating different watershed management activities.
Activities like tree and grass plantation, diversion canal and check dam construction, and gully pluggingare conducted. In some cases, potable drinking water facilities are also provided. The most tangible
benefit is the availability of drinking water.
Effectiveness
Conf l ic t resolut ion for resource al locat ion
CDGs with more households had lower levels of conflict than CDGs with fewer households because
they had more available resources. In this regard more than half of the respondents agreed that there
has never been dispute among the members for resource allocation. However,in Bungeshwori disputesoccur due to the scattered distribution of the households and allocation of resources to areas where
most people live, disregarding remoter inhabited areas.
Informat ion shar ing
Effective communication is as much a basic prerequisite to the attainment of organizational goals as
effective application of group dynamic techniques (Dwivedi, 1979), while lack of information andcommunication lead to passiveness, dissatisfaction, complaints, and low community participation. In
order to assess communication and sharing of information among community members, they wereasked how often they deliver (share) information with other members. This occurred most frequently
in Janachetana CDG. The site office situated at Bhaldanda (Janachetana CDG) and the local motivators
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
12/350
5
appointed by DSCO facilitated information dissemination and sharing among community members.
This was less effective in Amelichap.
Satisfaction
Satisfaction derived from the programme
There was a significant difference in satisfaction among the members regarding programme activity(Table 1). Respondents from Chotetar followed by Amelichap expressed comparatively higher levels
of satisfaction. The lowest level of satisfaction was found in Janachetana. These differences can beattributed to the variation in the number of households benefiting directly. The lower level of satisfaction
in Bungeshwori can also be attributed to the lower number of beneficiaries.
Table 1. Levels of satisfaction derived from the programme activity
Category
CDG Not satisfied Middling Satisfied Fully satisfied
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) 2 5.7 2 5.7 17 48.6 14 40.0
Chotetar (N=14) - - 2 14.3 3 21.4 9 64.3
Janachetana (N=6) 3 4.5 28 41.8 27 40.3 9 13.4Bungeshwori (N= 24) 5 20.8 7 29.2 11 45.8 1 4.2
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N= number of sampled households
Benefi t sharing
Benefits (cash income savings from programme activities and drinking water facilities) derived from
programme activities are shared among members. This is decided by the CDC and the beneficiaries.They formulate acceptable norms and rules and assure equitable benefit sharing. Most of the
respondents were satisfied with benefit sharing. The lower level of satisfaction expressed in Janachetanacould be attributed to most of the households not having access to the drinking water system developed
with financial and technical assistance from DSCO. In Amelichap (satisfied with the drinking water
facility), a secondary benefit is the irrigation facility derived from the wastewater from the drinkingwater system. Conversely, in Bungeshwori the lowest level of satisfaction was recorded.
Decis ion m aking
The role of CDG members in decision making is an important aspect for smooth running of programmeactivities. There are two opposing schools of thought regarding the decision-making structure: one
asserts that local organizations need strong executive leadership to deal decisively with the environment;the other relies more on maximum consensus and widespread participation of individuals in decision
making. Heller (1973), cited in Joshi et al. (1997) suggests that the success of a local organization in
terms of decision-making structure is important. MacKenzie (1993) found that consensus is importantnot only for reaching an acceptable decision but also for building long-term trust and support for
outcomes (MacKenzie 1993 cited in Margerum 1999).
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
13/350
6
Decision making for implementing rules and regulations
Decision making was effective in AAHNH (Janachetana CDG) where more than half of the sampled
households agreed to make consensus decisions. This is attributable to the higher literacy rate, exposureto the external environment, frequent contact with outsiders, and cooperation of local leaders.
ADALNH had weaker decision making, (Chotetar CDG). Members who break rules are punished.Punishments are recorded in the CDG constitutions, developed by the CDG members. More punishment
was found in Janachetana and less punishment in Amelichap.
Decision making for resource allocation
Since the resources are scarce and peoples demands are higher, different CDGs have different
decision-making processes: by committee members, in the assembly, and by the elite (or their influence).
This was effective in Janachetana, followed by Amelichap. This is attributable to the higher literacy
rate and the positive attitude towards programme activities.
Part ic ipat ion in programm e act iv i t ies
Peoples participation is viewed as a dynamic group process in which all members of a group contributeto the attainment of common objectives, share the benefits accruing from group activities, exchange
information and experience for common interest, and follow the rules, regulations, and other decisionsmade by the groups (Mishra, 1996). Organizational reasons for participation in collaborative efforts
include efficiency, access to resources and reduction of uncertainty through the development of
collective rules (Wood and Gary, 1991 cited in Margerum, 1999). Furthermore, Colfer and Wadley(2001), specify that increased participation provides a means for conflict resolution and empowerment.
Peoples participation is the basic input that the people can provide. Poor local people can contribute
labour in lieu of cash. There was good participation in Amelichap but this was not so evident in
Janachetana. Lower levels of participation and interest are because the majority of the respondentsare getting benefits from the Nepal Water for Health (NEWAH) programme rather than the programme
assisted by DSCO.
Transparency m aintained in p rogramme act iv ity
Removal of mistrust, apprehension, and misunderstanding among the CDG members is essential not
only for smooth functioning of the programme but also for establishing effective and long-term
partnerships within the community. In order to maintain transparency about programme activities,especially financial aspects, provisions are made in the CDG constitution; for example, the treasurer
should disclose income and the expenditure of resources at the general (community) assembly.
In this context, an obligatory provision is made to open a joint account between the CDG chairpersonand treasurer or secretary in a nearby bank; all transactions are conducted through their joint signatures.
Proper documentation is also essential for transparency. Therefore training on record keeping has
also been given to CDG members for proper archiving. The higher level of satisfaction with transparencywas in Janachetana CDG (Table 2). This can be attributed to the higher frequency of meetings and
the higher numbers at the meetings, as well as the higher literacy rate. The respondents in Chotetarexpressed a lower level of satisfaction. Less than one-fourth of the respondents expressed their full
satisfaction (Table 2) for transparency maintained within the community. The majority were dissatisfied.
One-fourth of the sampled households, which is the highest figure among the studied CDGs, wasannoyed about auditing.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
14/350
7
Table 2. Satisfaction regarding transparency
Category
CDG Not satisfied Somewhat satisfied Satisfied Fully satisfied
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) 3 8.6 6 17.1 14 40.0 12 34.3
Chotetar (N=14) 2 14.3 4 28.6 5 37.7 3 21.4Janachetana (N=67) 1 1.5 11 16.4 25 37.3 30 44.8
Bungeshwori (N=24) 3 12.5 2 8.3 9 37.5 10 41.7
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N= number of sampled households
Efficiency
Efficiency comprises achieving existing objectives with acceptable use of resources (Carnall, 1995).
It was obvious from the study that financial resources are scarce and the resources made available
by the agency concerned as well as community contributions (financial) were not sufficient to meetthe needs of the local people.
Work accompl ishm ent according to the plan and budget
For each and every activity a budget and plan are prepared with the assistance of field technicians forprogramme implementation. While preparing the estimates, local people are informed about their
contributions in conducting programme activities and the cost to be borne by the concerned agency.Timely accomplishment of the activity with desirable use of resources is necessary. Respondents
from Bungeshwori CDG expressed the highest level of satisfaction for work accomplishment according
to the prepared plan and budget.
Technical efficiency
Technical soundness is important. Respondents were asked to judge the quality of accomplished
activity. In Chotetar, most of the respondents were very positive about programme activity becausethey regarded it as important. During a field visit it was also found that the system was functioning
well and delivering efficient services to the resource users.
Eff icient uti l izat ion of resou rces
Mishandling of physical and financial resources causes considerable damage to the people and
ultimately leads to economic loss. Respondents were asked if they thought resources were being usedefficiently. Most of the respondents in Bungeshwori believed that resources had been utilized efficiently
(Table 3). In Amelichap, respondents were not so confident about this.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
15/350
8
Table 3. Accomplishment of work with efficient utilization of resources
Category
CDG Dont know Somewhat agree Agree Fully agree
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) - - 2 5.7 16 45.7 17 48.6
Chotetar (N=14) - - 6 42.9 6 42.9 2 14.3Janachetana (N=67) - - 5 7.5 27 40.3 35 52.2
Bungeshwori (N=24) - - 1 4.2 8 33.3 15 62.5
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N= number of sampled households
Prior i ty to adopt co st ef fect ive methods
As financial resources are scarce, care needs to be exercised about choosing cost-effective methods
for constructing development activities. Choice of bioengineering techniques, alternatives for high
cost materials, use of locally available skilled human resources, and generation of maximum peoplesparticipation in programme activities are considered in this context.
Performance of CDGs in the trail improvement programme
According to Sthapit (1994), a trail refers to the existing trail (narrow path), which is susceptible togully formation that causes erosion upslope or downslope, thus inconveniencing human and livestock
traffic. Trail improvement refers to the vegetative and structural measures applied to protect the trailfrom erosion and to improve the trail for general traffic. The main objective of this programme is to
reduce erosion from unmanaged trails, protect them from erosion, and to improve the trail for general
traffic.
Effect iveness
Method for dispute resolution
Janachetana CDG had fewer conflicts among the members (Table 4). Most respondents agreed thatthere had never been conflict for resource allocation. In Amelichap and Bungeswori CDGs only one-
tenth of the respondents indicated no conflict. This indicates that they are relatively ineffective in
resolving problems compared to the other two CDGs. Some respondents were interested in otherprogrammes.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
16/350
9
Table 4. Dispute for resource allocation
Category
CDG Frequently Sometimes Seldom Never
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) - - 9 25.7 13 37.1 13 37.1
Chotetar (N=14) 2 14.3 7 50.0 4 28.6 1 7.1Janachetana (N=67) - - 9 13.4 21 31.3 37 55.2
Bungeshwori (N=24) 3 12.5 9 37.5 10 41.7 2 8.3
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N= number of sampled households
Information sharing among the members
Respondents were asked how often they reported programme activities. The best information sharing
was in Janachetana because members were interested in the programme and found it useful. In
Bungeshwori, information was reported by the katuwal(a local person appointed by the villagers todeliver messages). He is responsible for delivering messages that are of concern to the villagers.
Every household is obliged to provide cash or in-kind support for his services. However, despite thisarrangement, most messages were delivered mutually by fellow members at meetings and informally
during personal visits.
Satisfaction derived from programme activity
The trail improvement programme is in high demand by local people in the study area because everyone
benefits equally. The direct benefit being easy traffic for local people as well as livestock. Some
people have complained about soil-erosion problems due to the poor condition of trails. The 24respondents from Bungeshwori were mostly satisfied with implementation of the trail improvement
programme. (This CDG is quite distant from the highway and they need easy and frequent access toreach it.)
Benefit sharing
One of the direct benefits is savings. Usually not less than 10 percent of the total programme cost isdeposited in the CDG bank by each group. The rest is obtained from external assistance and distributed
among the beneficiaries who are involved in construction work. None of the respondents, except
Chotetar, was dissatisfied with benefit sharing in the programme. Chotetar members had a low levelof participation. Apart from cash income, it is difficult to quantify other benefits. It is assumed that the
major benefit is trafficable roads.
Decision making for implementing rules and regulations
There was a significant difference in decision making in the CDGs. Relatively effective decision
making occurred in areas accessible to infrastructure facilities. Again, higher literacy rates and interestin the programme are reasons for better performance.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
17/350
10
Level of participation
This was higher in Bungeshwori (Table 5). Higher satisfaction encourages higher participation and
greater interest. Local farmers were interested in cash income from the programme but in one case(Janachetana) respondents indicated pressure by other members households who did not participate
in the programme would not receive benefits from the CDG. In Chotetar participation was lower.
Table 5. Level of peoples participation in the trail improvement programme
Categories
CDG Not good Middling Good Excellent
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) - - 2 5.7 23 65.7 10 28.6Chotetar (N=14) - - 2 14.3 11 78.6 1 7.1
Janachetana (N=67) - - 2 3.0 42 62.7 23 34.3Bungeshwori (N=24) 1 4.2 8 33.3 15 62.5
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N= number of sampled household
Satisfaction with transparency
Janachetana CDG expressed highest satisfaction for transparency. Nobody was dissatisfied. About
one-tenth of the respondents in Bungeshwori and Amelichap were dissatisfied. The level of satisfactionwas also lower in Chotetar and Bungeshwori.
Efficiency
Work accomplishment according to the plan and budget
This programme is labour intensive and good management of human resources is crucial. For efficient
utilization of resources and time, local people arbitrarily divided the work among different sections.
Each ad hocgroup is responsible for the assigned management tasks. Most respondents in Bungeshworiand Janachetana agreed that the work had been accomplished according to the prepared plan and
budget. Janachetana and Bungeshwori CDGs were more efficient. This higher efficiency is attributedto the higher level of peoples participation (Table 6) and their self-generated interest.
Table 6. Work accomplishment according to the plan and budget
Category
CDG Never Sometimes Most often Always
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) - - 5 14.3 26 74.3 4 11.4
Chotetar (N=14) 4 28.6 8 57.1 2 14.3
Janachetana (N=67) - - 3 4.5 30 44.8 34 50.7
Bungeshwori (N=24) 1 4.2 2 8.3 7 29.2 14 58.3
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N= number of sampled households
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
18/350
11
Technical efficiency
Work should be accomplished with an acceptable standard of quality. However, in the rural context
there is no hard and fast rule regarding the quality of work to be measured. Therefore it is difficult tojudge quality of work in the rural context especially where the work has been accomplished by local
people. In response to technical efficiency of the trail improvement programme, no one was dissatisfiedwith the quality of work.
Priority to adopt cost-effective methods
In order to minimize programme cost, discussions are held among beneficiaries about adopting cost-effective methods during surveying and preparing estimates with field technicians. Respondents were
asked how many precautionary measures had been taken to adopt cost-effective methods to reduce
programme cost. With the exception of Amelichap, more than two-thirds of the respondents in all of
the CDGs consented to prioritize cost-effective methods. A field visit revealed that all of the constructionwork had been done using locally available resources and in most of cases, bioengineering techniqueshad been used for plugging small gullies and diversion channels.
CDGs and conservation ponds
Ponds are hydrological lifelines in rural areas. In this study, conservation ponds refer to small pondsconstructed principally for trapping wastewater/runoff to reduce soil erosion and to enhance soil
moisture availability to the crops. The CDC, with CDG members, selects appropriate locations for
conservation pond construction. Twelve and eight ponds were constructed in Janachetana andAmelichap respectively; Chotetar and Bungeshwori had one conservation pond each. Since the
establishment of conservation ponds, beneficiaries have derived cash income by selling off-seasonvegetables like cauliflower, cucumber, beans, ladys fingers, chili, squash, and tomatoes. Mostly, the
vegetable products are sold directly to local middlemen and sometimes in Kathmandu Vegetable
Wholesale Market.
Effect iveness
Disputes in benefit sharing
The main benefit is irrigation facilities. Despite the lower number of households more disputes occurred
in ADALNH compared to AAHNH because no strict rules and regulations had been formulated. Thefewer disputes in AAHNH are attributable to the good relationships among the members and a goodconflict resolution mechanism within the community
Information sharing among the members
Sharing of information regarding programme activities was effective in AAHNH (Table 7). In thisregard, 52.2 percent of the respondents agreed to share information at meetings. Again, the good
relationships among the members was the primary factor. In ADALNH (Chotetar) only about one-fourth of the respondents communicated under the Always category; poorer relationships among
members were responsible for this low level.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
19/350
12
Table 7. Information sharing among the members
Category
CDG Dont care Sometimes Most often Always
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) - - 8 22.9 18 51.4 9 25.7
Chotetar (N=14) 3 21.4 - - 6 42.9 5 35.7Janachetana (N=67) - - 3 4.5 29 43.3 35 52.2
Bungeshwori (N=24) - - 7 29.2 9 37.5 8 33.3
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N= number of sampled households
Satisfaction derived from the programme
The respondents from AAHNH were more satisfied with the programme because of the cash benefits
derived from off-season farming practices. The ADALNH were less satisfied.
Benefit sharing among the members
Irrigation (the main benefit) enhanced cash income as beneficiaries sold their off-season farm produce
to the nearby market. In this regard the AAHNH were pleased with the programme, although benefitsharing is not relevant in this context; the respondents were satisfied because of higher income.
Decision making for implementing rules and regulations
It was compulsory for every household to participate in maintenance of the system. No one wasallowed to use water out of turn. Better consensus decision making was prevalent in accessible areas
with higher populations. In areas where people had been deriving more benefits, better rules and
regulations were exercised compared to lower income-generating groups.
Peoples participation in programme activity
The AAHNH was effective in mobilizing peoples participation compared to the ADALNH, benefits
being the powerful motivation factor. Some sources of cash income were dubious.
Transparency maintained among the members
Good mutual understanding among the members, community decision making by consensus, frequent
meetings, and proper record keeping help to maintain good transparency among the members inAAHNH. This is not the case in ADALNH.
Efficiency
Work accomplishment according to the plan and budget
There was no significant difference between the CDGs regarding work accomplishment. This indicates
that all of the CDGs work efficiently in the conservation pond programme. Some of the respondents
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
20/350
13
in ADALNH complained about delay in budget release and untimely availability and delivery of
construction material which hampered programme activities.
Accomplishment of work with efficient utilization of resources
A more or less similar level of efficiency was observed in all of the CDGs (Table 8). Besides human
and financial resources, the important material resource in this activity was cement, which is expensiveand perishable.
Table 8. Accomplishment of work with efficient utilization of resources
Category
CDG Dont agree Somewhat agree Agree Fully agree
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Amelichap (N=35) 1 2.9 3 8.6 17 48.6 14 40.0
Chotetar (N=14) - - 3 21.4 4 28.6 7 50.0
Janachetana (N=67) 1 1.5 10 14.9 20 29.9 36 53.7
Bungeshwori (N=24) 1 4.2 5 20.8 6 25.0 12 50.0
Source: Field Survey (2001)
Note: No. = number, % = corresponding percentage of the total number of respondents, N = number of sampled households
Technical efficiency of accomplished work
Most of the work was accomplished by the local users without the external assistance of skilled
human resources. The ponds constructed in the study area were in good condition and operating well.In Chotetar, service delivery (required quantity of water) was unavailable from the pond.
Priority to adopt cost-effective methods
Beneficiaries made maximum use of locally available resources in order to reduce the cost of the
programme. Nevertheless, the responses reveal that they are not very effective in adopting cost-effective methods, probably because of their dependency on external resources, especially cement,
which elevates the cost of construction as well as adding financial burden.
Sustainability of CDGsA legitimized and effective organization is essential to achieve goals. Therefore the CDGs were
formed to develop sustainable management of institutions for the continuation, maintenance, anddissemination of skills related to soil conservation and watershed management practices. The basic
objective underlying the formation of CDGs has been to search for alternatives that could be sustained
in the future (APROSC, 1997). Most donors report a strong correlation between the sustainability ofdevelopment outcomes and the effectiveness of institutional intervention (Morgan and Qualman, 1996).
Furthermore, they also clarify that achieving some sort of institutional sustainability is an ongoingprocess rather than an end state.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
21/350
14
Peoples attitudes
When the funding and the implementing agencies withdraw support from the project area it is the
peoples attitude and participation that determines the future of the system. Therefore whether thesystem can be sustained or not depends mostly upon the households degree of responsibility, i.e. the
programmes have been implemented for their benefit and they themselves should take care of thesystem. Respondents revealed that they are more interested in direct benefits like water source
protection, income generation, and irrigation canal improvement rather than programmes with longer
gestation periods before benefit distribution.
ADALNH respondents expressed their reluctance to contribute to programme activities, Mainlybecause watershed management is dependent on external resources and resources allocated by DSCO
are insufficient to run the programme. Also local people are relatively poor at record keeping of
financial transactions.
Necessity of peoples part icipation in watershed management
The policy of the watershed management programme is to involve local people in every stage of the
programme so they can manage the resources by themselves and fulfill their basic needs by generatingincome.
Most of the respondents strongly expressed the need for peoples participation for watershed
management. No one disagreed.
Pol i tical suppo rt
The CDG as an institution is inevitably a part of village political life and political support to developmentwork; this enhances smooth and effective functioning of development programmes. Therefore the
stronger the political support the better the success of the particular programme activity will be.Overall political support for watershed management activities to CDGs was not encouraging. This is
attributable to lack of coordination with local leaders and their biases.
Human resource development
The development of local human resources has been the focus of DSCO for effective watershed
management and organizational sustainability. User group capacity building is crucial for the formationof viable user groups. Training is gradually increasing and extending to a wider audience of farmers.
The training includes adult literacy, account and record keeping, income generation, skills development,nursery techniques, bee keeping, horticulture, vegetable production, and mushroom production. If thetypes of training requested by the farmers differ from the regular training (e.g. agriculture, livestock,
cottage industries etc.) being conducted by DSCO, then DSCO coordinates with line agencies toprovide the requested training. Most of the respondents from Chotetar expressed their full support for
human resource development. However in Janachetana and Bungeshwori, respondents perceived
comparatively lower levels of human resource development.
Fund mob i l izat ion
The promotion of group savings as the basis for revolving credit facilities for group members has also
been an important factor in sustaining community-based groups. Presently the main sources of income
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
22/350
15
are savings from the programme activities, monthly savings, membership fees, and interest from
investment. However the user groups are accumulating funds in an impressive manner by pooling
individual resources. In this manner most of them are now saving money. User groups are found to belending money at a rate of 24 percent per month for CDG members. Despite the higher interest rate,farmers reported they are willing to accept the charge, promising to repay within the time frame fixed
by the CDGs. Community organizations with more households, especially Janachetana, invested saving
funds. Only nominal funds were mobilized for purchasing improved varieties of seeds, goats, urea,and household utilities.
Formal regist rat ion
The formal registration of the CDG affords the organizational status of NGO. However there aresome legal problems with the formally registered organizations (Karki and Sharma, 1999). A CDG
registered under the NGO framework is always a non-profit making corporate body. Thus the NGOframework is not helpful in promoting the individual profit-sharing expectations of CDG members.
Part icipation in maintenance work
Participation in water source protection was relatively better in areas where there is a scarcity ofdrinking water.In most cases, the respondents seemed to have reduced interest in participating in
maintenance work (Chotetar and Amelichap) compared to participation at the programme
implementation stage.Money is being extracted from saving funds (Chotetar and Amelichap) fordrinking water system maintenance. However most of the work needs higher labour contribution.
The highest rating of more than one-third, for the water source protection programme, belonged to
Janachetana; percentage-wise, Bungeswori had the highest rating of 58.3 percent for the trailimprovement programme; a more or less similar rating was found in all of the CDGs for the
conservation pond programme. This difference in the level of peoples participation indicates thatparticipation in maintenance work depends on their needs.
External suppo rt
There has been some support in dissemination of technology and programme activities. Remarkably,Janachetana has been successful in drawing significant resources from NEWAH for the drinking
water system programme and Janachetana households are benefiting. This indicates that theJanachetana CDG is running its programme activities efficiently.
Conclusion
Most of the households depend on subsistence agriculture due to scant opportunity for off-farmactivities. This has a negative effect on land productivity, which ultimately leads to a decline in the
socio-economic condition of the watershed inhabitants. In this regard the CDGs are playing an important
role in the better management of watersheds and socio-economic improvement. The CDGs nearestto infrastructure facilities with higher numbers of households were better at watershed management
activities. Democratic decision making for resource allocation and benefit sharing as well astransparency and communication is essential to reduce disputes and maintain good relationships among
the members. Positive attitudes, higher participation in programme activities, sufficient funding and its
mobilization, external assistance, and favourable political support (coordination) are fundamental forthe better performance and sustainability of the community organization.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
23/350
16
Literature cited
Adhikari, R. 1996.Participatory Rural Development in Nepal: Comparative Study of GO, NGO
and Locally Initiated Projects in Syangja District. Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand.APROSC.1997. Socioeconomic Studies of Selected Sub-Watersheds in the Districts of Rasuwa,
Nuwakot and Dhading, (Vol. IV), Base Line Survey and Institutional Development Modalities
of Kumpur Sub-Watershed Dhading.Nepal/Denmark Watershed Management Project, ProjectSupport Office, Kathmandu. Nepal.
Bogati, R.1999.DANIDA Supported Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Programin Nepal.Proceedings of DANIDAs Third International Workshop on Watershed Development,
Kathmandu, Nepal.
Carnall, C.A.1995.Managing Change in Organizations.Prentice Hall, London.
Colfer, C.J.P. & Wadley R.L.1999. Scoring and Analysis Guide for Assessing Human WellBeing.Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Indonesia.
Dwivedi, R.S.1979.Human Relation and Organizational Behavior. Mohan Primlani, Oxford andIBH Publishing Co., India.
Hansen, J.M.; Shrestha, B.D. & Pudasaini, B.1995.Biophysical Survey of Dhading, Rasuwaand Nuwakot Districts and Selected Sub-Watersheds.Department of Soil Conservation, Ministry
of Forest and Soil Conservation (MOFS) and Danish International Development Assistance(DANIDA), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Joshi, N.; Jali, N.M. & Hamid, A.H.1997. Organizational structure, performance and participation:forest user groups in the Nepal Hills.In G.Shivakoti, G. Varughese, E. Ostrom, A. Shukla and G.
Thapa (eds). People and Participation in Sustainable Development: Understanding the
Dynamics of Natural Resource System. Proceedings of an International Conference. Institute
of Agriculture and Animal Science /Tribhuvan University, Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal.HMG/CBS.2000. Statistical Pocket Book, Nepal.National Planning Commission Secretariat, Central
Bureau of Statistics, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Karki, B.B. & Sharma, R.K.1999. Community Development Group Registration Study. DevelopmentVision, Nepal.
Margerum, R.D.1999.Integrated Environmental Management: The Foundation for SuccessfulPractice, Environmental Management.Springer Verlag, New York Inc., Vol. 24, No. 2, pp.158.
Mishra, B. 1996. A successful case of participatory watershed management at Ralegan Siddhivillage in District Ahmadnagar, Maharastra India.In P.M. Sharma and M.P. Wagle (eds).A Case
Study of Peoples Participation in Watershed Management in Asia, part 1: Nepal, Chinaand India . PWMTA-WMTUH-FARM, Field Document No. 4, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Morgan, P. & Qualman, A.1996. Institutional and Capacity Development, Result BasedManagement and Organizational Performance.Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA).
Paudel, G.S.2000. Farmer Led Management Practices in the Hills of Nepal: A Comparative Study
of Watersheds With and Without External Intervention. Doctoral Thesis. AIT, Bangkok,
Thailand.
Shrestha, M. 1991. Parental Attitude towards Education: Gender Analysis in the Context of an
Urban Fringe Community, Nepal. AIT Masters Thesis. Bangkok, Thailand.
Sthapit, K.1994. Concept of Soil and Watershed Conservation in Hilly and Plain Areas.
Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management, Kathmandu, Nepal.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
24/350
17
Integrated Watershed Management: Studies and Experiences from Asia
Edited by Michael Zoebisch, Khin Mar Cho, San Hein & Runia Mowla. AIT, Bangkok, 2005
INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF WATERSHEDS WITH AND WITHOUTEXTERNAL ASSISTANCE IN THE HILLS OF NEPAL
Shrutidhar Tripathi1
Introduction
Mountain and upland watersheds constitute 25 percent of the earths land surface. However, little
understanding of mountain specificity by planners and policy-makers and the inability of development
efforts to harness local niches have aggravated economic woes and threatened prospects for mountaindevelopment. The Hindu Kush-Himalaya is one of the youngest mountain systems in the world and
thus subject to high rates of natural erosion. Rivers originating in the region carry much more silt thanthose originating elsewhere. Furthermore, prevailing socio-economic conditions contribute to serious
erosion and watershed instability.
The Himalayan Kingdom of Nepal is experiencing environmental and ecological degradationwhich increases soil erosion thereby reducing farm productivity. Cultivation on the mountainous terrain
has raised questions about the suitability of intensive land-use practices that threaten the condition of
watersheds where soil-erosion rates are already high owing to the fragile ecosystem.
The ever-increasing population in the hills of Nepal has increased pressure on natural resources.
With no access to better quality lands and no off-farm employment opportunities, local people haveremoved forest and grass cover to fulfill their basic needs for food, fodder, fuelwood, and timber.
Nepal is reported to have the highest livestock density per unit of cultivated land in the world. Assortedspecies of livestock are sources of draught power, dairy products, meat, and manure. Therefore,
reducing the number of livestock directly impacts farm productivity as most of the farming activitiesare carried out with livestock. Hill farming requires the net transfer of nutrients from the forest and
rangeland, through fodder and leaf litter, to animals. Fodder and grasses are used to make up the feed
deficit and leaf litter is mixed with dung to fertilize the farmland. Due to limited arable land with highlyfragmented and small land-holdings; low productivity; extension of cultivation to less productive marginal
and steeply sloping land; decline in the use of organic manure; and lack of improved agricultural inputsand off-farm employment opportunities, poor farming households have to rely on the forests and
public land for livestock rearing.
The watershed management programme was initiated by the Department of Forest in July 1966
through the project Survey and Demonstration for the Development and Management of the TrisuliWatershed A Pilot Project. In most cases, policies and programmes for mountain watersheds had
been designed and implemented using a centralized top-down approach, which allows little scope for
adjusting to situations at the local level. This type of compartmental approach often proved to beunsustainable in the context of Nepalese mountain watershed management.
1
MSc. Thesis (Ref. No. RD-01-11), Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand. August 2001.Examination Committee - Dr. Gopal B. Thapa (Chair), Prof. Karl E. Weber, Dr. Michael A. Zoebisch
http://covercontents.pdf/http://covercontents.pdf/http://covercontents.pdf/7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
25/350
18
The top-down approach has numerous pitfalls, especially the non-involvement of watershed
inhabitants in management planning, which questions the success and validity of the programmes
(Chambers, 1993; Brooks, 1993).Currently, bottom-up planning has been encouraged to muster farmers participation for the
sustainability of watershed management projects, with emphasis on increasing productivity whileconserving the resource base. The concept of integrated watershed management planning has been
institutionalized and a participatory group approach has become mandatory as a means to plan,
implement, and maintain programmes while sharing benefits. Developing sense of ownership, generatingself-help attitudes among local people, reducing the cost of project implementation, and sustaining the
achievements of the project are some reasons to motivate people to participate in watershedmanagement. An integrated watershed management project needs to address all the problems in the
watershed area be they socio-economically related or natural resources related. A number of watershed
management projects have been completed and are running in the hills of Nepal. A successful watershed
management project is expected to have positive spillover effect in adjacent watersheds with similarsocio-economic and biophysical conditions.
In mountain watersheds, the level of community development, including the socio-economic
condition, influences the extent of natural resource management (NRM) and the knowledge andcapacity of the community. One of the major indicators to assess the level of community development
is the presence and functionality of community level institutions. High public participation in resourcemanagement activities can be expected only in those communities where local institutions are functioning
well because these institutions act as a binding force among otherwise scattered people. Community
forest groups, irrigation groups, and drinking water management groups are working in the field ofNRM, whereas agricultural groups, cooperatives, and savings/credit groups are associated with natural
resource conservation for improving social cohesion and enhancing the economic condition of the
local people. Therefore, institutional analysis has become a useful tool in the field of community-based NRM for understanding how local communities manage resources and how improvements in
management can be initiated. The Begnas Tal-Rupa Tal (BTRT) Watershed Management Projecthad applied a participatory approach to watershed management. Involvement of existing local institutions
and the formation of new local institutions was mandatory to get the local people involved in projectactivities. This project was initiated in 1985, completed its first phase in 1989, and a second phase in
1994. Various reports and papers on the BTRT Project have claimed that the institutional building of
local organizations like the Community Development Conservation Committee (CDCC), user groups,cooperatives, and local NGOs are some outstanding examples of the achievements of the BTRT
project.
This research has studied the impact of the functioning of all kinds of local institutions in relation
to the management status of natural resources. The common approach/technique for impact evaluationis to compare before and after situations, which heavily relies on baseline data and/or the memories
of the settlers. As far as this researcher knows, so far, no one has conducted any research to appraiseinstitutional aspects in relation to watershed management by comparing two watersheds with and
without incentives.
Soil-erosion rates vary significantly according to location, slope gradient, and land-use type but
the estimated rates 60 t/ha/year of average soil loss in the upper Andhikhola Watershed of thewestern region; and 33 t/ha/year in the Tinau Watershed of the central region provide sufficient clues
that resources are being degraded at a considerable rate. Increasing cropping intensity has beensought as an alternative to declining crop yields and food deficits. Cropping intensification demands
higher amounts of inputs including farmyard manure (FYM) and chemical fertilizers (Schreier et al.,
1995). But, declining resources required to produce FYM and farmers inability to purchase chemical
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
26/350
19
fertilizers have impeded increases in farm productivity. The hill farmers have traditionally followed
integrated soil-management practices based on their indigenous knowledge.
Local organizations are being mobilized by a number of watershed management projects. Viablelocal institutions enable peoples participation in planning, implementation, and maintenance of project
activities (Jensen, 1995). The main thrust of institutional building in watershed management is toexamine management procedures that secure better performances from local organizations. Institutional
capacity, which guides the institutional performance, can be strengthened to improve the work
performance of local organizations. In the past, grassroot institutions have managed forest, rangeland,and water resources successfully in the hills of Nepal (Gurung, 1995; Poudel, 1997; ICIMOD, 1986).
Mountain watershed plans are targeted at the more marginalized groups in the watershed, such
as women, the landless, and marginal farmers. Any watershed management activities should serve to
address equity in the watershed where most investment is taking place on the land. Until recently,programmes and projects aimed at improving the socio-economic conditions of the people tended to
be initiated, designed, and implemented by top level agencies and institutions without systematicconsultation and involvement of the intended beneficiaries.
Participation in watershed management is an area that has failed to capture the needs andaspirations of watershed inhabitants. The social, economic, institutional, and biophysical conditions in
the watershed are expected to be better than areas without any projects. Accomplishment of objectivesis better with a high degree of peoples participation. The specific objectives are: to assess the status
of farmland, forest, and grazing land resources from watershed settlers perspectives; to assess the
structural and functional systems of local organizations and their role in the management of naturalresources; to evaluate the efficiency of local institutions in mustering public participation in natural
resource conservation and management; and to suggest policies for strengthening local institutionalcapacity for watershed management.
The study area
Two watersheds, namely, Begnas Tal-Rupa Tal Watershed, hereafter referred to as the ProjectWatershed and Kali Khola Watershed, hereafter referred to as the Non-project Watershed were
selected (Figure 1). The Bijayapur Khola River separates these two watersheds.
The Non-project Watershed was selected because its biophysical and social structure is sufficiently
similar and comparable with the Project Watershed. In addition, it is accessible and close to theProject Watershed. Therefore, it was easy to collect data from both watersheds in a given period of
time.
Biophysical and socio-economic conditions of the study area
Biophysical condi t ion
Project Watershed
The Project Watershed is located 10 km northeast of Pokhara City. It covers an area of about173 km2including two major lakes Begnas Tal and Rupa Tal. The watershed is characterized by a
complex and heterogeneous topography with mazes of irregular ridges and spurs, and gentle to very
steep slopes. It has steep north- and south-facing slopes of 40-65
and 35-40
respectively. The elevation
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
27/350
20
Study Area in
Kaski District
Pokhara
Figure 1. The study area in Kaski District
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
28/350
21
ranges from 600 m at the valley bottom to 1 417 m at Thulakot. The valley bottom is characterized by
relatively low relief, gentler slopes, and a lower dissection index (
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
29/350
22
The climate is sub-tropical and sub-humid; the monsoon rainfall is characterized by hot and wet
summers, and cold and dry winters. In the forests of higher altitudes, the predominant species of trees
areArundinaria intermedia (Nigalo). In the middle region, Fratrinus floribundas(Langri), andQuercus lanuginosa(Baajh) are predominant whereas in the lower section Shorea robusta(Sal),Schima wallichii (Chilaune), Castanopsis indica (Katus),Myrica esculenta (Kafal),Debregesia
salicifolia (Dar), andAlnus nepalensis(Utis) are predominant tree species. The general types of
soil in the watershed are alluvial on the valley bottom and laterite soil on the hill slopes.
Social co ndi t ions
Watershed settlers live in heterogeneous social conditions in terms of household structure, available
labour force, occupations, and employment patterns. These factors determine the overall economiccondition of households. The farm household is the fundamental unit of the farming systems. It has its
own scope within which household members interact to satisfy their requirements. Household size,age structure, gender, educational level, occupations, farm size, land types, and other farm resources
are the major variables influencing the farm households income and ultimately the level of their
participation in resource management activities.
Table 2. Gender composition in the two watersheds
Gender Project watershed(n=103) Non-project watershed(n=109)
f % Mean f % Mean
Male 249 47 2.42 289 49 2.65Female 281 53 2.73 308 51 2.85
Total 530 5.15 594 5.5
Gender ratio 0.89 0.96
Source: Household survey (2001)
f= Frequency
The gender ratio in the Project Watershed was slightly lower than the Non-project Watershed,i.e. there were more women than men in both the study watersheds (Table 2). But 96 percent of the
households in the Project Watershed and nearly 84 percent of the households in the Non-projectWatershed were headed by men. Most of the population in the Project Watershed had primary level
education while nearly one-fourth of the population had secondary level education in the Non-project
Watershed. Up to primary level, the percentage of women was higher but above primary level, men
dominated.
Economic condition
Household income came from crop farming and livestock raising, and from non-agricultural sources.The economic status of the household depended largely on the land-holding size, total production, and
number of livestock.
Agricu l tural systems
In an agrarian society, as in the study area, land-holding size has significant importance in determining
the overall economic condition of the household. The average land-holding in the Project Watershed
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
30/350
23
was nearly 13.5 ropaniper household (1 ropani= 0.05 ha), which was slightly higher than the Non-
project Watershed. However, the average size of Phantkhet, which is considered the best quality
land, was nearly double in the Non-project Watershed. Tarikhetshared the largest proportion of thetotal land size in both watersheds. The average number of parcels per household was about three inboth watersheds; however, land fragmentation in the Non-project Watershed was slightly higher due
to relatively lower average land-holding size. The size of average land cultivated per household was
smaller than the average land-holding size. This was because farmers did not farm in Kharbari orjungle land (Table 3).
Table 3. Area cultivated by land type
Type of land Project Watershed(n = 103) Non-project Watershed(n = 109)
Average area Percent of Average area Percent of
per hh in ropani total land per hh in ropani total land
Phantkhet 1.7 (2.9) 13.4 1.9 (2.9) 20.9
Tarikhet 5.2 (6.9) 42.4 4.4 (4.0) 47.6Gharbari 3.5 (3.0)** 28.0 2.0 (1.6)** 21.0
Bari 2.0 (2.9)** 16.3 1.0 (1.6)** 10.5
Average 12.3 100.0 9.3 100.0
Source: Household survey 2001
NB: * Significantly different at 0.05 confidence level (two tailed t-test)
** Significantly different at 0.01 confidence level (two tailed test)
Figures in parentheses are standard deviations in the respective category
1 ha = 20 ropani
Three percent of the households in the Project Watershed were landless. Small farmers whoconstituted 44 percent of the total households in the Project Watershed and 37 percent in the Non-project Watershed owned only 17 percent of the total land. Medium farmers, who represented 30
percent in the Project Watershed and more than 50 percent in the Non-project Watershed, owned 50
percent of the total farmland per household.
Millet occupied third position in terms of production per unit of land in the Project Watershedwhile this applied to maize in the Non-project Watershed. The average income from fruit farming per
household in the Project Watershed was significantly higher than the average income from fruit
farming in the Non-project Watershed. About 68 percent of the total households in the Project Watershedand 80 percent of the total households in the Non-project Watershed had food deficits from their own
production. The average number of large ruminants per household in the Project Watershed was
significantly higher than the Non-project Watershed but in contrast, the average income from largeruminants in the Non-project Watershed was significantly higher than the Project Watershed. In the
Non-project Watershed, medium farmers dominated livestock raising.
Cropping systems
Altogether 19 types of cropping pattern in the Project Watershed and 16 types of cropping pattern in
the Non-project Watershed were observed. In the Project Watershed, more farmers practised fruitcultivation and coffee farming than in the Non-project watershed. Normally, farmers choice over
specific types of cropping pattern depends upon land types, irrigation facilities, access to technology,access to market, and farmers preference over certain crops. Adoption of agroforestry was also
observed more in the Project Watershed. According to farmers of the Project Watershed, coffee
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
31/350
24
farming, in this area, was introduced by the BTRT project. In the Project Watershed, cropping intensity
was highest in the Gharbarifollowed byBari, whereas in the Non-project Watershed, the highest
cropping intensity was observed in theBariland followed by Gharbari. The average cropping intensitywas higher in the Non-project Watershed than the average cropping intensity in the Project Watershed.Three agricultural cooperatives were operating in the Non-project Watershed. In a subsistence economy
with small land-holdings, crop diversification ensures farmers food supply.
Role of local institutions in agricultural systems
The types of local institutions operating in the Project and in the Non-project Watersheds and their
objectives differed; thus differences in watershed agricultural systems were observed. In the Project
Watershed, the BTRT project had promoted conservation farming during project implementation viathe CDCC. According to local farmers, the BTRT project informed farmers of the importance of
farmland management and techniques to manage farmlands. The effect was reflected by highercropping diversification in the Project Watershed. Cooperatives play a significant role in enabling
local farmers by providing technical as well as credit support. Local institutions can motivate farmers
to adopt innovations. The main focus of the BTRT project was resource conservation; hence thefarmers in the project area were more concerned with resource conservation than farmers in the non-
project area. Contrariwise, cooperatives were promoting intensive use of farmland resources to increaseproduction in the Non-project Watershed; hence farmers were using their farmland more intensively
than farmers in the project area.
Major problems in the farming systems
Lack of quality inputs was a constraint perceived by farmers in both watersheds. For many farmersin the Non-project Watershed lack of farm labour was another constraint, but this was not the case in
the Project Watershed. Inadequate access to extension services plagued both watersheds (Table 4).
Table 4. Major problems in farming
Major problems Project Watershed Non-project Watershed
(n=103) (n=109)
f % f %
Lack of water for irrigation 83 38.2 75 40.8Lack of quality agricultural inputs 66 30.0 36 19.6
Insufficient farm labour 10 4.6 37 20.1
Inadequate access to the extension service 28 13.4 26 14.1and disease problemsNatural disaster 30 13.8 10 5.4
Total 217 174
Source: Household survey (2001)
f= Frequency of response
For livestock raising, insufficiency of water, feed, fodder and grazing space hindered farmers in
both watersheds. Disease too was noted by both groups but rated higher in the Non-project Watershed.
7/22/2019 IWM AIT Zoebisch 2005
32/350
25
Household cash incom e from non -agr icul tural sources
Of the total number of people involved, 70 percent in the Project Watershed and 80 percent in the
Non-project Watershed were male. In the Non-project Watershed, more women worked as wagedlabourers. In terms of the total average income from the non-agriculture sector, the highest average
income came from petty business followed by the service sector in the Project Watershed. These twosectors shared more than three-fourths of the total average non-farm income per household. Average
income per household from the service sector, from pensions, and from remittances in the Non-
project Watershed was higher (most people being involved in the service sector inside and outside thecountry).
Status of farmland, forest, and grazing land
In an agrarian society land is the major means of sustenance for the people. The amount of farm
produce entirely depends upon the quality of land especially in those areas where farmers are not ableto supp
Top Related