Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward
The increasing incidence of forest and land degradation is affecting billions of people, and causing loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Realizing the importance of forest restoration in moderating those impacts, various global and regional forest restoration initiatives (including Bonn Cha...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Land use policy 2022-04, Vol.115, p.106033, Article 106033 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 106033 |
container_title | Land use policy |
container_volume | 115 |
creator | Laudari, Hari Krishna Aryal, Kishor Maraseni, Tek Pariyar, Shiva Pant, Basant Bhattarai, Sushma Kaini, Tika Raj Karki, Gyanendra Marahattha, Anisha |
description | The increasing incidence of forest and land degradation is affecting billions of people, and causing loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Realizing the importance of forest restoration in moderating those impacts, various global and regional forest restoration initiatives (including Bonn Challenge 2011 and UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) have been launched. But the gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities is becoming a huge challenge because of the limited knowledge on forest restoration approach as well as underlying socio-economic and ecological factors impacting the restoration undertaking. Moreover, few studies have comprehensively looked at institutional, socio-economic, and ecological aspects of forest restoration in a common framework. By employing a systematic review of the literature (n = 64), review of policies, plans and project reports (n = 58) and expert survey (n = 22), this study has navigated the rise and fall of Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices. Our study found that Nepal’s forest restoration interventions from 1956 to the early 1980s got mixed results because of the limited integration of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration programs. However, forest restoration works after the mid-1980 s charted a more successful pathway because of (1) policies favouring decentralized decision making and local institutions; (2) devolution of rights and responsibilities; (3) firmed commitment for and adoption of multistakeholder partnership for the forest and landscape restoration; (4) recognition of multifunctionality of forest ecosystems; (5) accommodation of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration program; 6) adoption of multiple restoration approaches at multiple scales; and 7) capacity development and extension services. As institutional, socio-economic, and ecological factors are often been overlooked in forest and landscape restoration initiatives, the inferences we made and suggestions we provided can inform the policymakers and practitioners (of Nepal and other countries) in translating regional and global restoration commitments into action.
•There is still a gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities.•We have assessed Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices.•Socio-economic and environmental factors has shaped trajectories of forest restoration.•Forest restoration programs need to be recalibrated considering changing contexts. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106033 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2689714555</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0264837722000606</els_id><sourcerecordid>2689714555</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c346t-27c7fe9af2221c06ac85e56fc6fe51114ee01980cd9a2211eecd49dd55ae51723</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUEtLxDAQDqLguvofAp67JmmTtN508QWLCuo5hGQCKbWpSXfX_femVPDoZQZmvsfMhxCmZEUJFVftqtO93SYYQrdihLE8FqQsj9CC1rIsuOTVMVoQJqqiLqU8RWcptYQQ0VC2QK9v_ns8FM7vAB9Ax4SDwy5ESCOeSoh69KHHvsfPMOjuGm8gpdAn3GV0DxZnd7zXh4m019GeoxOnuwQXv32JPu7v3tePxebl4Wl9sylMWYmxYNJIB412jDFqiNCm5sCFM8IBp5RWAIQ2NTG20RlBAYytGms513kvWblEl7PuEMPXNl-q2rCNfbZUTNSNpBXnPKPqGWViSCmCU0P0nzoeFCVqyk-16i8_NeWn5vwy9XamQv5i5yGqZDz0BqyPYEZlg_9f5Acndn7J</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2689714555</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Laudari, Hari Krishna ; Aryal, Kishor ; Maraseni, Tek ; Pariyar, Shiva ; Pant, Basant ; Bhattarai, Sushma ; Kaini, Tika Raj ; Karki, Gyanendra ; Marahattha, Anisha</creator><creatorcontrib>Laudari, Hari Krishna ; Aryal, Kishor ; Maraseni, Tek ; Pariyar, Shiva ; Pant, Basant ; Bhattarai, Sushma ; Kaini, Tika Raj ; Karki, Gyanendra ; Marahattha, Anisha</creatorcontrib><description>The increasing incidence of forest and land degradation is affecting billions of people, and causing loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Realizing the importance of forest restoration in moderating those impacts, various global and regional forest restoration initiatives (including Bonn Challenge 2011 and UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) have been launched. But the gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities is becoming a huge challenge because of the limited knowledge on forest restoration approach as well as underlying socio-economic and ecological factors impacting the restoration undertaking. Moreover, few studies have comprehensively looked at institutional, socio-economic, and ecological aspects of forest restoration in a common framework. By employing a systematic review of the literature (n = 64), review of policies, plans and project reports (n = 58) and expert survey (n = 22), this study has navigated the rise and fall of Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices. Our study found that Nepal’s forest restoration interventions from 1956 to the early 1980s got mixed results because of the limited integration of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration programs. However, forest restoration works after the mid-1980 s charted a more successful pathway because of (1) policies favouring decentralized decision making and local institutions; (2) devolution of rights and responsibilities; (3) firmed commitment for and adoption of multistakeholder partnership for the forest and landscape restoration; (4) recognition of multifunctionality of forest ecosystems; (5) accommodation of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration program; 6) adoption of multiple restoration approaches at multiple scales; and 7) capacity development and extension services. As institutional, socio-economic, and ecological factors are often been overlooked in forest and landscape restoration initiatives, the inferences we made and suggestions we provided can inform the policymakers and practitioners (of Nepal and other countries) in translating regional and global restoration commitments into action.
•There is still a gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities.•We have assessed Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices.•Socio-economic and environmental factors has shaped trajectories of forest restoration.•Forest restoration programs need to be recalibrated considering changing contexts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0264-8377</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5754</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106033</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Agricultural extension ; Biodiversity ; Biodiversity loss ; Bonn challenge ; Capacity development ; Community-based forestry ; Decentralization ; Decentralized governance ; Decision making ; Devolution ; Ecological effects ; Economic development ; Economics ; Ecosystem restoration ; Ecosystem services ; Ecosystems ; Environmental restoration ; Forest ecosystems ; Forests ; Land degradation ; Land use ; Landscape ; Landscape restoration ; Literature reviews ; Participation ; Policies ; Policy making ; Regions ; Socioeconomic factors ; Socioeconomics ; Terrestrial ecosystems</subject><ispartof>Land use policy, 2022-04, Vol.115, p.106033, Article 106033</ispartof><rights>2022 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Apr 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c346t-27c7fe9af2221c06ac85e56fc6fe51114ee01980cd9a2211eecd49dd55ae51723</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c346t-27c7fe9af2221c06ac85e56fc6fe51114ee01980cd9a2211eecd49dd55ae51723</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106033$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,3554,27875,27933,27934,46004</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Laudari, Hari Krishna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aryal, Kishor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maraseni, Tek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pariyar, Shiva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pant, Basant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhattarai, Sushma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaini, Tika Raj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karki, Gyanendra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marahattha, Anisha</creatorcontrib><title>Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward</title><title>Land use policy</title><description>The increasing incidence of forest and land degradation is affecting billions of people, and causing loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Realizing the importance of forest restoration in moderating those impacts, various global and regional forest restoration initiatives (including Bonn Challenge 2011 and UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) have been launched. But the gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities is becoming a huge challenge because of the limited knowledge on forest restoration approach as well as underlying socio-economic and ecological factors impacting the restoration undertaking. Moreover, few studies have comprehensively looked at institutional, socio-economic, and ecological aspects of forest restoration in a common framework. By employing a systematic review of the literature (n = 64), review of policies, plans and project reports (n = 58) and expert survey (n = 22), this study has navigated the rise and fall of Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices. Our study found that Nepal’s forest restoration interventions from 1956 to the early 1980s got mixed results because of the limited integration of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration programs. However, forest restoration works after the mid-1980 s charted a more successful pathway because of (1) policies favouring decentralized decision making and local institutions; (2) devolution of rights and responsibilities; (3) firmed commitment for and adoption of multistakeholder partnership for the forest and landscape restoration; (4) recognition of multifunctionality of forest ecosystems; (5) accommodation of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration program; 6) adoption of multiple restoration approaches at multiple scales; and 7) capacity development and extension services. As institutional, socio-economic, and ecological factors are often been overlooked in forest and landscape restoration initiatives, the inferences we made and suggestions we provided can inform the policymakers and practitioners (of Nepal and other countries) in translating regional and global restoration commitments into action.
•There is still a gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities.•We have assessed Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices.•Socio-economic and environmental factors has shaped trajectories of forest restoration.•Forest restoration programs need to be recalibrated considering changing contexts.</description><subject>Agricultural extension</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biodiversity loss</subject><subject>Bonn challenge</subject><subject>Capacity development</subject><subject>Community-based forestry</subject><subject>Decentralization</subject><subject>Decentralized governance</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Devolution</subject><subject>Ecological effects</subject><subject>Economic development</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Ecosystem restoration</subject><subject>Ecosystem services</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental restoration</subject><subject>Forest ecosystems</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Land degradation</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Landscape</subject><subject>Landscape restoration</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Participation</subject><subject>Policies</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Regions</subject><subject>Socioeconomic factors</subject><subject>Socioeconomics</subject><subject>Terrestrial ecosystems</subject><issn>0264-8377</issn><issn>1873-5754</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUEtLxDAQDqLguvofAp67JmmTtN508QWLCuo5hGQCKbWpSXfX_femVPDoZQZmvsfMhxCmZEUJFVftqtO93SYYQrdihLE8FqQsj9CC1rIsuOTVMVoQJqqiLqU8RWcptYQQ0VC2QK9v_ns8FM7vAB9Ax4SDwy5ESCOeSoh69KHHvsfPMOjuGm8gpdAn3GV0DxZnd7zXh4m019GeoxOnuwQXv32JPu7v3tePxebl4Wl9sylMWYmxYNJIB412jDFqiNCm5sCFM8IBp5RWAIQ2NTG20RlBAYytGms513kvWblEl7PuEMPXNl-q2rCNfbZUTNSNpBXnPKPqGWViSCmCU0P0nzoeFCVqyk-16i8_NeWn5vwy9XamQv5i5yGqZDz0BqyPYEZlg_9f5Acndn7J</recordid><startdate>202204</startdate><enddate>202204</enddate><creator>Laudari, Hari Krishna</creator><creator>Aryal, Kishor</creator><creator>Maraseni, Tek</creator><creator>Pariyar, Shiva</creator><creator>Pant, Basant</creator><creator>Bhattarai, Sushma</creator><creator>Kaini, Tika Raj</creator><creator>Karki, Gyanendra</creator><creator>Marahattha, Anisha</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202204</creationdate><title>Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward</title><author>Laudari, Hari Krishna ; Aryal, Kishor ; Maraseni, Tek ; Pariyar, Shiva ; Pant, Basant ; Bhattarai, Sushma ; Kaini, Tika Raj ; Karki, Gyanendra ; Marahattha, Anisha</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c346t-27c7fe9af2221c06ac85e56fc6fe51114ee01980cd9a2211eecd49dd55ae51723</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Agricultural extension</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biodiversity loss</topic><topic>Bonn challenge</topic><topic>Capacity development</topic><topic>Community-based forestry</topic><topic>Decentralization</topic><topic>Decentralized governance</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Devolution</topic><topic>Ecological effects</topic><topic>Economic development</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Ecosystem restoration</topic><topic>Ecosystem services</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental restoration</topic><topic>Forest ecosystems</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Land degradation</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Landscape</topic><topic>Landscape restoration</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Participation</topic><topic>Policies</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Regions</topic><topic>Socioeconomic factors</topic><topic>Socioeconomics</topic><topic>Terrestrial ecosystems</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Laudari, Hari Krishna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aryal, Kishor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maraseni, Tek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pariyar, Shiva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pant, Basant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhattarai, Sushma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaini, Tika Raj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karki, Gyanendra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marahattha, Anisha</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Land use policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Laudari, Hari Krishna</au><au>Aryal, Kishor</au><au>Maraseni, Tek</au><au>Pariyar, Shiva</au><au>Pant, Basant</au><au>Bhattarai, Sushma</au><au>Kaini, Tika Raj</au><au>Karki, Gyanendra</au><au>Marahattha, Anisha</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward</atitle><jtitle>Land use policy</jtitle><date>2022-04</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>115</volume><spage>106033</spage><pages>106033-</pages><artnum>106033</artnum><issn>0264-8377</issn><eissn>1873-5754</eissn><abstract>The increasing incidence of forest and land degradation is affecting billions of people, and causing loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Realizing the importance of forest restoration in moderating those impacts, various global and regional forest restoration initiatives (including Bonn Challenge 2011 and UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) have been launched. But the gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities is becoming a huge challenge because of the limited knowledge on forest restoration approach as well as underlying socio-economic and ecological factors impacting the restoration undertaking. Moreover, few studies have comprehensively looked at institutional, socio-economic, and ecological aspects of forest restoration in a common framework. By employing a systematic review of the literature (n = 64), review of policies, plans and project reports (n = 58) and expert survey (n = 22), this study has navigated the rise and fall of Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices. Our study found that Nepal’s forest restoration interventions from 1956 to the early 1980s got mixed results because of the limited integration of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration programs. However, forest restoration works after the mid-1980 s charted a more successful pathway because of (1) policies favouring decentralized decision making and local institutions; (2) devolution of rights and responsibilities; (3) firmed commitment for and adoption of multistakeholder partnership for the forest and landscape restoration; (4) recognition of multifunctionality of forest ecosystems; (5) accommodation of socio-economic and ecological concerns in restoration program; 6) adoption of multiple restoration approaches at multiple scales; and 7) capacity development and extension services. As institutional, socio-economic, and ecological factors are often been overlooked in forest and landscape restoration initiatives, the inferences we made and suggestions we provided can inform the policymakers and practitioners (of Nepal and other countries) in translating regional and global restoration commitments into action.
•There is still a gap between restoration commitments and their ground realities.•We have assessed Nepal’s 65 years of forest restoration practices.•Socio-economic and environmental factors has shaped trajectories of forest restoration.•Forest restoration programs need to be recalibrated considering changing contexts.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106033</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0264-8377 |
ispartof | Land use policy, 2022-04, Vol.115, p.106033, Article 106033 |
issn | 0264-8377 1873-5754 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2689714555 |
source | PAIS Index; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Agricultural extension Biodiversity Biodiversity loss Bonn challenge Capacity development Community-based forestry Decentralization Decentralized governance Decision making Devolution Ecological effects Economic development Economics Ecosystem restoration Ecosystem services Ecosystems Environmental restoration Forest ecosystems Forests Land degradation Land use Landscape Landscape restoration Literature reviews Participation Policies Policy making Regions Socioeconomic factors Socioeconomics Terrestrial ecosystems |
title | Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-02T06%3A38%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sixty-five%20years%20of%20forest%20restoration%20in%20Nepal:%20Lessons%20learned%20and%20way%20forward&rft.jtitle=Land%20use%20policy&rft.au=Laudari,%20Hari%20Krishna&rft.date=2022-04&rft.volume=115&rft.spage=106033&rft.pages=106033-&rft.artnum=106033&rft.issn=0264-8377&rft.eissn=1873-5754&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106033&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2689714555%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2689714555&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0264837722000606&rfr_iscdi=true |