Author: Samir Bhandari
Nepal’s shift to a federal democratic republic serves as a pillar for equitable development and inclusive government. Local government operation act (2017) primary focus on local implementation to empower the local levels (municipalities and rural municipalities) is to manage, protect and adjudicate disputes regarding basic environmental and natural resources. This is important to address natural resources management which is a state of progression of the country’s economic and development factors. Climate change is directly impacted based on the utility of natural resources management. The practices in Nepal which has brought conflicts are the new NRM policy contradicting regional cultural customs. Besides, people’s competitive economic motivation to obtain more natural resources keeping the environment and economic odds. Similarly, the changes in the use pattern are also considered to be conflicts arise in Nepal. However, the management of natural resources has become a major cause of dispute as the three levels of government federal, provincial and local begin to exert their constitutional powers. Natural resource and climate related disputes, ranging from the distribution of hydropower royalties to the exploitation of riverbed materials, are putting Nepal’s federal structure’s resilience and capacity for good governance to the test.
The division of power over natural resources is complicated and frequently overlaps under the new federal structure. In the most recent natural resource division of the community forestry tax among the three tiers has resulted in heavy suffocation in the CFUGs as they are liable to pay to all the governments while delivering services to the country at free will. The concurrent powers granted to various levels of government by the Nepalese Constitution, although meant to foster cooperation, have often resulted in jurisdictional conflict. These common conflicts consist of extraction and revenue sharing, forest management, water and energy and irrigation. Although local governments view the removal of sand, gravel and stones from riverbeds as essential sources of income, provincial laws and environmental concerns can lead to a tug of war for control and financial gain between these three tiers. Ownership and management of forest products are points of contention between local governments and Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs). There are several policy gaps over who has the final rights over local community forest and natural resources available in these forests who can use these resources because of the shift from centralized management to local monitoring as a result local governments frequently feel ignored while the federal government pushes for massive hydroelectric projects. Conflicts about compensation, the impact on local ecosystems and the equitable distribution of electricity and royalties are common. The crisis is worsened by the climate catalyst.
Climate change is a “threat multiplier” that exacerbates already existing resource shortages and adds new levels of conflict. IPCC’s 6th Assessment identifies Nepal as among the world’s most climate vulnerable nation and the effects are felt most keenly at the ground level. Water supplies are drying up due to shifting rainfall patterns and retreating glaciers. This leads to “upstream and downstream” conflicts, which frequently transcend municipal or provincial borders as towns vie for scarce water for irrigation and consumption. Indigenous and marginalized populations are being uprooted by climate related disasters like landslides, soil erosion, desertification and floods. The search for resources to support newcomers, the ensuing internal movement frequently results in land use conflicts among host communities. Indigenous populations are most at risk since their cultures and means of subsistence are closely entwined with natural resources. Deeply ingrained social and political conflict results from development initiatives meant to slow down climate change or harness energy frequently ignoring these populations’ traditional rights and environmental knowledge on NTFPs, MAPs as well as the indigenous livelihood practice like shifting of pastureland from high Himalaya to lower grazing field.
Funder et.al., 2012
The wide range of actors are mainly the three state tiers, judicial committees, community groups and private sector are important role bearers involved to comprehend these conflicts. The main legal actors include local municipal offices, provincial executive bodies and federal ministries. Policy structures for intergovernmental dispute resolution like community forest and its natural resources although putting these arrangements into practice is still difficult as they frequently lack the technical resources to address complex environmental disputes. These are headed by the local vice chairperson or deputy mayor at the local governance level. These committees are provisioned under the constitution to settle local conflicts. They provide a crucial point of citizen engagement in local conflict resolution. Water user associations and community forest user groups are important stakeholders that are frequently at the core of conflicts with the government over management and rights. The media and civil society are another important player in promoting the rights of the underprivileged and enhancing the openness of governmental procedures. They serve as watchdogs and mediators for disputes that come up throughout governance procedures. Economic interests that conflict with environmental and community concerns are frequently represented by developers and contractors engaged in resource extraction and infrastructural projects.
Federalism has a legal foundation, but policy arrangements for inter-governmental conflict resolution are still developing. A National Natural Resources and Fiscal Commission is established by the Constitution, but political scheming frequently impedes its ability to mediate issues pertaining to specific resources. Furthermore, strong public participation is necessary for the implementation of federalism. Conflicts over service delivery and expectations inevitably occur when citizens are left out of the implementation process. The ambiguity of constitutional clauses pertaining to concurrent powers frequently results in a race to the bottom where all come to profit while forbidding the responsibility for conservation and protection in which many governmental levels vie for the same resources without a common social or environmental agenda.
The persistence of discrimination against ethnic, religious, minority, gender and disability groups is a crucial component of these conflicts. The interests of these excluded groups are frequently not adequately protected by policy and structural frameworks. For instance, women’s participation, indigenous communities and marginalized groups. Although women are becoming more prevalent in local government, patriarchal norms frequently restrict their practical influence over decisions pertaining to natural resources like owing the land mostly under the name of male. Large scale development construction frequently ignores the connection between indigenous communities and natural resources. In addition to causing local strife, this puts traditional ecological knowledge which is crucial for climate adaptation at risk of disappearing.
Several revolutionary actions are required to guarantee that disputes over natural resources and climate change do not impede Nepal’s development such as making policy arrangements well defined, strengthening judicial committees, inclusive citizen engagement and learning from practices. Clear legislative frameworks that specify the precise responsibilities and revenue sharing arrangements for each of the three levels of government are required desperately. Federalism’s “cooperation, coexistence and coordination” premise must be put into practice. It is essential to increase the capacity of local judicial committees. The issues pertaining to the environment and resources must possess both legal and technical expertise, making them available to all citizens to mediate fairly and successfully. Governance needs to transcend hierarchical for making decisions. Conflicts can be avoided before they arise when citizens, especially marginalized and indigenous groups, actively participate in the administration of local resources. The provinces should exchange exemplary case studies and lessons learned to standardize best practices which aid in developing a resilient system examining “successful and unsuccessful practices” in settling disputes pertaining to governance.
Natural resource and climate change disputes in Nepal are more than just administrative roadblocks rather they are basic issues of identity, social fairness and sustainable development. Nepal can turn these conflicts into chances for more robust and inclusive governance by bolstering intergovernmental relations, empowering local conflict resolution institutions and putting residents at the center of resource management. Nepal’s ability to manage its natural resources in a way that safeguards the environment and benefits all its citizens, regardless of their socioeconomic, religious or traditional background, will reflect the gap within federal governance system. As we proceed, the emphasis must continue to be on environmental peacebuilding along with conflict transformation that is not only resolving the conflict but also altering the underlying structures that give rise to it.
Author Introduction
Samir Bhandari is an ecologist and botanist with an M.Sc. in Botany specializing in Ecology and Natural Resource Management from Tribhuvan University, Nepal. He has conducted field studies in conservation areas including Manaslu and published his work in academic journals and national media. Samir has also contributed to environmental initiatives through the USAID Clean Air Project and has received research grants from organizations including the National Trust for Nature Conservation.
The views and opinions expressed in the piece above are solely those of the original author(s) and contributor(s). They do not necessarily represent the views of Governance Monitoring Centre Nepal and/or Centre for Social Change.
