Archives: Programs
Mentoring and Advisory Service on Food and Agriculture
The main objectives of the project is to provide technical support to Karnali agriculture and food concern group and other Fastenopfer partners on agricultural issues.
Practice of resilience in mountain landscapes: Exploring risk and landscape investments in rural Nepal (PECA III)
This project aims to explore how smallholders cope with and adapt to environmental, economic and social changes, and how these processes affect the landscape they inhabit. It will also contribute to the growing body of socio-political nuanced understandings of resilience and adaptive capacity.
This is an interdisciplinary research project and will combine ethnographic methodology with the analytical concepts of resilience, risk, adaptive capacity and landesque capital, in order to understand smallholders’ strategies and practices of livelihood security and landscape investments.
Uprating Community Forest management in Nepal: enhancing biodiversity and livelihoods
The first phase of the project demonstrated a solid scientific foundation (documenting key biodiversity components, identifying specific threats and their causes, communicating ecological significance of the forest with local communities and government, piloting invasive species management practices, and identifying locally suitable agroforestry) for forest biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of forest biological resources. The project demonstrated the effectiveness of alternative livelihood options and created a strong collaborative environment and engagement with local communities. The second phase of the project will scale up successful pilot interventions, capitalising on opportunities identified, and mobilising a network of highly-engaged local communities.
Support ForestAction’s Core Activities on Agriculture & Food
This project aims to promote agroecology in Nepal through policy research advocacy, capacity-building and technical support to smallholder farmers.
Assessment of conservation status of aquatic biodiversity in Karnali and Mahakali River Basins
Biodiversity impact evaluation of Hariyo Ban II livelihood intervention
Science based Interventions Reversing Negative Impacts of Invasive Plants in Nepal
The main objectives of the project: Building the knowledge base – filling gaps in botanical identification, appearance and characterization, Producing multi-lingual manuals on recognition and control of invasive plants, Informing and filling policy gaps for better management of invasive plants, Raising awareness of local people on identification of invasive plants and their impacts, Providing technical assistance to CFUGs in controlling invasive plants
Assessing forest-based livelihoods dependence and understanding the impact of forest investments on livelihoods
The primary objective of this project is to analyze the three questions: What impact has been generated by specific types of forest interventions across different policy and governance contexts? Which forest interventions have resulted in more positive impacts and why? Where and under what conditions do forest interventions deliver positive impact?
Revitalising community forestry through national dialogue and international conference
The project “Enhancing livelihoods from improved forest management in Nepal (EnLiFT 2)”, is a forestry research project with funding assistance from the Government of Australia through the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR). The project builds on the success and lessons of the 5-year project FST/2011/076, Enhancing livelihoods and food security from agroforestry and community forestry in Nepal, also known as the EnLiFT project.
EnLiFT is a collaboration among two international organizations and five national organizations. In its six-year tenure (1 December 2018 – 30 Dec 2024) it aims at understanding the socio-ecological impacts of Active and Equitable Forest Management (AEFM); improving local government planning in the context of rapid social, economic and political change; strengthening the Community Forestry User Groups (CFUG) system in the context of new local government powers; reducing gender inequality in community forest decision-making; low-labor input activities that are suitable for time-poor women; tree-based enterprises that could be deployed on under-utilized land (UUL); a new institutional framework for regulatory and institutional cooperation between the CFUGs and local governments; pro-poor forest based enterprises models; alternative regulatory structures for marketing forest products; and responses to the disconnection between research and policies for improving livelihoods.
Major Themes and Priority Actions
Active and Equitable Forest Management (AEFM)
– Application of AEFM in community and private forests.
– Capacity building of communities and stakeholders.
– Analysis of changing socio-ecological dynamics.
– Research supported policy making in forest management.
Planning and Governance
– Develop and apply inclusive planning framework in community forestry.
– Test and institutionalize models of Community Forestry-Local Government (CF-LG) planning.
– Test and institutionalize gender equality models in community forestry.
– Facilitate strengthening of research-policy interface in forestry planning and governance.
Forest Based Enterprises
– Analysis of forest enterprises and value chain.
– Understand and facilitate regulatory reforms in forest based enterprises.
– Promote pro-poor and gender equitable forest based enterprises.
– Facilitate research backed policy process towards promoting forest based enterprises.
Thinking Beyond REDD: Analyzing Smallholder’s Motivation and Action for Ecosystem Services Management(PECA II)
The main objectives of the project are a) How do small holders perceive and manage ES on their holdings and within the larger surrounding landscape? B) What motivations drive individual and collective action by small holders to maintain or invest in integrating ES management with food production and how might these actions be supported? C) What are the bureaucratic (i) policies, (ii)challenges and (iii)processes that the integration of ES with food production will face and how might they be addressed?