Utilise Domestic Timber

Nepal has been endowed with rich natural resources that include snowy mountains, fertile land, rivers, forests, minerals, medical herbs and biodiversity. Natural resources play a critical role in achieving growth and shared prosperity if the country effectively harnesses them. Nepal’s water resources are often touted as the instrument of rapid development. This is true but the country’s other resources need to be fully recognised and exploited to increase revenue and employment. It requires building the state’s capacity and enacting enabling laws to overcome obstacles to this end. Many have heard a popular saying – Hariyo Ban, Nepal Ko Dhan (green forest, Nepal’s wealth). This slogan implies that the country’s vast swathes of areas were filled with forests and herbs. The reasons behind calling forests ‘wealth’ were not purely monetary. The forests were considered a source of clean oxygen. Besides, they protect soil and provide shelter to animals, birds and species.

The green wealth was destroyed owing to massive deforestation in the past. However, with the expansion of community, private, and national forests, forest cover has now reached around 46 per cent of the country’s land area. The abundant growth in forests has benefitted the people living in the vicinity. Still, the country has been unable to utilise the valuable forest resources truly. It has been harvesting less than 17 per cent of the timber available from national forests, resulting in an estimated annual economic loss of Rs 19.95 billion in revenue and Rs 4.58 billion in employment, according to a news report published in this daily on Sunday. The country imports timber and its products worth around Rs. 6 to 8 billion each year. Experts are of the view that Nepal not only saves money by utilising the domestic timbers but also earns foreign currencies by exporting them abroad.

Nepal has been importing plywood, raw timber, and various wood-based furniture materials from India, Indonesia and China, Myanmar and Malaysia. Timber imports can be substantially reduced by utilising and exporting the local lumber. Like crops, timber is cut and replanted. Tibet Autonomous Region of China and India are potential markets for Nepali timber. However, there should not be any misconception and legal complexity. Following the adoption of the federal system, there has been ambiguity as to which layer of the government is responsible for the management of the forests. The federal government has placed forests on the common-concern list. This policy has given rise to controversy instead of determining the rights between the national and sub-national governments.

Provinces have been authorised to look after the forests but they have failed to devise laws and allocate funds to this end. As a result, the federal government has taken the responsibility to protect and utilise the forest resources. Lack of policy clarity, bureaucratic delays and institutional risk aversion must not come in the way of cashing in on the forest resources that have gone to waste. Several studies have suggested recognising community forestry as a multi-functional enterprise, while simplifying timber harvesting and transport procedures. The introduction of a co-production model involving federal, provincial and local government, communities and the private sector provides a solution to the current contradiction. With the strong government in place, clear policies and laws related to the harvesting of forest resources need to be unveiled without further delay. The federal and provincial laws must be geared towards the production of sustainable timber, creation of jobs, generation of revenues and conservation of forests.