Tree and Land Tenure in the Eastern Terai, Nepal: A Case Study from the Siraha and Saptari Districts, Nepal
by Bhishma P. Subedi, Chintamani L. Das and Donald A.Messerschmidt
Edited by Daniel Shallon
The methods of rapid appraisal (RA) were used to conduct the tree and land tenure research. One of the objectives of this study was to use and evaluate rapid appraisal in the field, assess its value as a tool for community forestry research and development and to recommend adaptations, specifically to the methodological guidelines by J.W. Bruce in Rapid Appraisal of Tree and Land Tenure (1989).
Rapid appraisal (sometimes called rapid rural appraisal, or RRA) is a relatively new tool, developed during the 1980s, for assessing the socio-economic situation of a given context in a limited period of time. In some ways it is a powerful tool, but it has its limits.
Rapid appraisal is neither the only answer nor the last word in development research needs. It is only the first, a beginning. RAs are designed, in part, to replace the more conventional, formal, often highly quantitative "traditional" surveys and structured questionnaires. Molnar (1989:2) notes four problems with formal surveys:1
RA techniques are designed for specific and usually limited purposes, frequently to satisfy decision makers who need relevant, accurate and usable information quickly. "The challenge is to find ways for outsiders to learn about rural conditions which are more cost-effective - which lead to information and understanding which are closer to the optimal in trade-offs between cost of collection and learning, and relevance, timeliness, accuracy, and actual beneficial use" (Chambers 1987:33).
Many RAs are exploratory, addressing key questions and hypotheses. Others are highly topical, sometimes based on the findings of an earlier exploratory RA. RAs are also used for monitoring and evaluation, and some are participatory in nature, closely involving villagers and local officials in the process (McCracken et al 1988). Often RAs are used to identify key issues and topics for future research, or for planning research requiring more detailed, longer, more conventional methods of analysis.
Good RA process stresses rapid and progressive learning and the selective use of secondary data to frame initial hypotheses, topics, sub-topics and questions. Researchers then use semi-structured interviews with key informants and groups following prearranged protocols or rules of procedure. Team members make careful observations in the field to supplement the interviews. The process concludes each day with review and analysis of the day's results and adjustment of plans for the continuation of the appraisal. RAs are ideally conducted by interdisciplinary teams whose members rely on their own and their informants' perceptive observations of what is happening, what is important, what makes sense.
An important characteristic of RAs is their reliance on local technical knowledge which can be defined as "the sum of experience and knowledge of a given ethnic group that forms the basis for decision making in the face of familiar and unfamiliar problems and challenges" (Warren and Cashman 1988:3). For RA purposes, this refers to the body of local cultural knowledge about the rural environment, including farm and forest ecosystems, based on years of trial and error experience in subsistence and survival.
A frequent question concerns the difference between conventional development research (e.g., surveys and structured questionnaires) and rapid appraisal. Table 7 outlines some fundamental distinctions.
Team composition: In his guidelines to the rapid appraisal of tree and land tenure, J.W. Bruce (1989) is unspecific about the composition or preferred disciplinary expertise of team members. He assumes that researchers will have a high level of experience in the region, speak the relevant local language, be knowledgeable in the principles of tenure and conversant in forestry. This, unfortunately, is not always the case. Rarely does one find such a constellation of prime qualifications in one individual, let alone in all members of a team. It is more likely that each team member will be well qualified in some subject, but will have prepare in others before embarking on the appraisal.
|TABLE 7: CONVENTIONAL RESEARCH AND RAPID APPRAISAL COMPARED|
|Techniques Employed||Conventional Research||Rapid Appraisal|
|Statistical analysis||Often a major part||Little or none, use of triangulation|
|Formal questionnaires||Often included||Avoided|
|Interviews with local farmers and key informants||Through formal questionnaire if at all||A major component, semi-structured interviewing|
|Qualitative descriptions and diagrams||Not as important as the 'hard data'||Considered at least as important as statistical data|
|Sampling||Statistically acceptable sample regarded as necessary. Usually random sampling||Often small sample size, selecting 'key' areas, farms, households, etc. 'Statistical' requirements not always adhered to|
|Consulting of secondary data sources||Yes||Yes|
|Measurements||Detailed, accurate||Qualitative indicators used|
|Group discussion||Informal unstructured sessions||Via semi-structured workshops and brain-storming|
|Adapted with modifications from McCracken et al 1988:11.
The discussion in text is keyed to the seven topics.
Custom and rule: In studying the tenure of scarce resources, Bruce proposes a fundamental methodological rule: fieldwork should concentrate first and foremost on custom or behaviour, i.e., on what people actually and traditionally do. The rule of law - what people can and cannot legally do, own or use - is in the realm of book work, and serves best as background to the larger enterprise, well away from the field. Where questions about rules must be asked, Bruce advises caution. There is no more certain way to arouse suspicions and undermine the reliability and validity of the data than by asking insensitive questions about law and ownership ahead of custom and use. Thus, in the present study, work proceeded from custom (chalan) to rule (niyam), being especially careful with issues of legality and illegality concerning villagers' use of government reserve forest in the Churia Hills. Following Bruce's advice, investigation began "with questions about people's use of trees, working from behaviour to tenure" (1989:22).
Using checklists and questionnaire schedules: Bruce's guidelines provide several examples of checklists and interview questionnaire schedules for data gathering. One checklist deals with rights to use of trees on commons, another is designed to elicit relative labour requirements and benefits for species on a commons (1989:67-68). Similarly, Bruce proposes a simple field question schedule with columns to be filled in, regarding economic value of trees to households, typical labour requirements, various use of tree products, access and ownership, etc. (1989:36-37).
An attempt was made to adapt some of these checklists and questionnaire schedules by adjusting them to fit the local situation. Under field interview conditions, however, it proved difficult to keep the conversation flowing along the logic of such lists. Good RA process works best when informants are allowed the freedom to elaborate what is to them a salient point, whether it is on the topical checklist or not. Since most informants were illiterate, they showed little interest in the checklist as a tool to focus conversation. Indeed, many found it confusing, even when mediated by careful and simple questioning. While villagers would begin answering the first checklist questions, they would soon deviate from the topic at hand to elaborate on a subject that a particular question had elicited, a subject that was obviously important to them, and hence to the study.
The forest ranger assistants, on the other hand, being unskilled in semi-structured interviewing techniques, preferred to follow a checklist or questionnaire. To them, it was a familiar and useful crutch in an otherwise difficult situation. Even they, however, soon became frustrated when informants drifted away from the topic. In response to the rangers' apparent need for more structure, it was suggested that they ask six basic questions to further the interview conversations: Who? When? What? Where? Why? How? (Limpinuntana 1987:170). To this, a seventh was added: So What? The "so what" question helped to assess the meaning and significance of the data being gathered. Bruce also uses the six questions, but in the form of more specific sample questions to be asked in relation to use rights and tree species on private holdings, commons and government reserves.
Household interviews and user group observation: Bruce stresses both a wide approach to data gathering through observing the whole village context, and a narrower, more focused approach through conducting specific household interviews and observations. The experience of this study suggests that this important indication could be further enlarged upon by adding the third aspect of user group observation. By accompanying the Musahars into the Churia Forest, for example, many useful insights were obtained regarding resource scarcity, equity and benefits on both legal and illegal, regulated and unregulated tenures. The combination of household observation techniques with observations of such user groups is a highly recommended strategy.
Using sketch maps: This is one of the principal methods of data gathering described in Bruce's guidelines. Sketch mapping is a potentially effective way to elicit local knowledge about resources and tenure circumstances. In order to determine rules of access to forests and rights to various tree resources on private holdings, commons and in the forest reserve, an attempt was made to engage villagers in sketch mapping.
Asking villagers themselves to draw the maps, however, did not work. The majority of informants, being illiterate, were unfamiliar and, hence, uncomfortable with pencil and paper. A modified approach was tried, assigning one researcher to sit with informants and start drawing a map. First, he would make a line on the paper and identify it verbally and visually as the nearby lane or cart track. Next, the researcher sketched in a house or another nearby and visible structure. Then an informant would be asked to point out the location of his or her home compound in relation to what was already drawn. This was followed by questions about location and the size of fields, orchards, sources of fuelwood, common lands, village forests, etc., including distance between home and these sites. In this way, the detail of the map was gradually filled in (see Figure 3). Sketch mapping served two distinct purposes: first, it was a useful tool for collecting certain kinds of information on tenure that are better understood when viewed graphically. Second, it served as a sort of "ice-breaker" and rapport-builder, because villagers are readily attracted to graphic media (both maps and photographs) and the mapping activity usually attracted small crowds.
Analysing the data: The critical process of rapid appraisal analysis requires further study. While Bruce outlines some useful assessment tools, more detailed descriptions of analytical concepts, tools and methodologies for use after the fieldwork need to be elaborated. It cannot be assumed that analysis flows naturally from good RA process and practice. On the contrary, the complex nature of the questions being examined (resource scarcity, equity and policy to address landlessness and treelessness) can make the analytical portion of the study far from "rapid." In the end, several techniques were used to enhance the analysis of data in order to make it the most useful. To complete the task of preparing a comprehensive final report, the following analytical strategies were used, both in and out of the field:
Figure 3: Village Sketch Map
|TABLE 8: SIRAHA AND SAPTARI DISTRICTS COMPARED|
|Total area||1 188 sq km||1 363 sq km|
|Elevation||76 m to 895 m||61 m to 305 m|
|Hills/plains||28% / 72%||32% / 68%|
|Length (N-S)||28.8 km||43 km|
|Breadth (E-W)||28.8 km||24 km|
|Longitude||86o 6' - 86º 27' E.||86º 28' - 87º 7' E.|
|Latitude||26o 33' - 26º 55' N.||26º 25' - 26º 47' N.|
|Main rivers||Kamla, Mainabati, Gagan, Khutti, Balan||Koshi, Triyuga, Balan, Mahuli, Khando|
|Temp. (max/min)||36 / 17º C||38 / 16º C|
|Annual rainfall||1 442 mm||1 717.5 mm|
|Population/total||411 336||379 055|
|Male||212 707||194 376|
|Female||198 629||184 679|
|Density||346/sq km||278.1/sq km|
|Male/female||52% / 48%||51% / 49%|
|Households||74 788||68 919|
|Occupation (averaged for both districts):|
|Other (from hills)||3%||3%|
|Colleges||2 (Siraha and Lahan) (local campuses of Tribhuvan University)||1 (Rajbiraj)|
|Land and Agriculture|
|Land under cultivation||108 551 ha||95 607 ha|
|Per capita landholding||1.4 ha||0.3 ha|
|No. of landowners||75 431||41 876|
|No. of tenants||49 916||11 876|
|More than 5 ha||2 618 families||-|
|16 880 persons||-|
|1-5 ha||21 780 families||-|
|140 060 persons||-|
|Less than 5 ha||13 200 families||-|
|85 800 persons||-|
|Landless||4 003 families||-|
|40 075 persons||-|
|Land Use Patterns|
|Churia Hills||27 800 ha||44 100 ha|
|Terai Plains||97 400 ha||94 100 ha|
|Total||125 200 ha||138 200 ha|
|Churia Hills||1 500 ha||800 ha|
|Terai Plains||82 000 ha||81 700 ha|
|Total||83 500 ha||82 500 ha|
|Churia Hills||200 ha||100 ha|
|Terai Plains||7 600 ha||6 700 ha|
|Total||7 800 ha||6 800 ha|
|Terai Plains||1 400 ha||2 800 ha|
|Total||1 400 ha||2 800 ha|
|Churia Hills||25 300 ha||30 100 ha|
|Terai Plains||1 300 ha||1 900 ha|
|Total||26 600 ha||32 000 ha|
|Churia Hills||400 ha||400 ha|
|Terai Plains||500 ha||800 ha|
|Total||900 ha||1 200 ha|
|Churia Hills||400 ha||12 700 ha|
|Terai Plains||4 600 ha||200 ha|
|Total||5 000 ha||12 900 ha|
|Timber/Firewood Demand (1986)|
|Fuelwood Demand||334 400 metric tons (mt)||342 200 mt|
|Supply||209 800 mt||212 500 mt|
|Deficit||124 600 mt||129 700 mt|
|Timber Demand||17 000 cu.m.||17 500 cu.m.|
|Supply||11 200 cu.m.||11 400 cu.m.|
|Deficit||5 800 cu.m.||6 100 cu.m.|
|Pop. engaged in agriculture||95%||92%|
|Major crops||grains, legumes and pulses, oil seeds, vegetables, fruits, misc. cash crops (tobacco, sugar cane, potato, jute)||grains, legumes and pulses, oil seeds, vegetables, fruits, misc. cash crops (tobacco, sugar cane, potato)|
|Major fruit trees||mango, leechy, papaya, guava, custard apple, jackfruit||mango, leechy, papaya, guava, custard apple, jackfruit|
|Industries||cotton textiles, bricks and tiles, bidi (cigarette), mills (rice, oil, flour, sugar), leather tanning, cement||match factory, bricks and tile, bidi (cigarette), mills (rice, oil and flour), sawmill, bakery, solvents, textiles|
|Communities (former Village Panchayats)||111||113|
|Towns (former Town Panchayats)||1 (Lahan)||1 (Rajbiraj)|
|Medical||General hospital (Siraha), 15 beds; Eye Hospital (Lahan), 15 beds||General hospital (Rajbiraj) 50 beds; 11 health posts|
|Projects||Sagarmatha Integrated Rural Development Project; telephone, drinking water, irrigation, roads||irrigation, road, post office, electrification, drinking water, hospital construction|
|Forestry||DIECF Project Sagarmatha Integrated Rural Development Project||DIECF Project|
|Irrigation coverage by canal or channel||32 894 ha||13 812 ha|
|coverage by pumping unit||700 ha||9 000 ha|
Note:The figures in this table are adapted from district and national sources. They are not always consistent, not all for the same years and they are of varying reliability. The demographic data for Siraha are more recent and appear to be more reliable than those for Saptari. We have tried to use the most current sources (e.g., Aryal et al 1982, Nepal 1987, Joshi and Moorkha 1987), but in the area of demography, for example, with dated statistics up against a population growth rate conservatively estimated at 2.6%/yr, the figures given here should be considered low, viewed with skepticism and used with extreme caution.
|TABLE 9: BRAMAHAN-GORCHHAARI AND BAKDHUWAA COMPARED|
|BRAMAHAN-GORCHHAARI (Siraha)||BAKDHUWAA (Saptari)|
|Population||2 342||4 258|
|Household Size||4.8 persons||4.6 persons|
|Dominant caste and Ethnic groups (% of Total hhs)||Chaudhary (34%) Musahar (26%) Mahato (14%) Chamar (8%) (11 others, 18%)||Chaudhary (25%) Bahun/Chhetri (15%) Yadav (15%) Musahar (11%) Miya (Muslim) (10%) (10 others, 24%)|
|Mean elevation||100 m||108 m|
|Soil type||loamy haplaquepts (aeric)||loamy haplaquepts (aeric) and ustochrepts|
|Main crops||paddy, wheat, maize, millet and misc. cash crops||paddy, wheat, maize, millet and misc. cash crops|
|Fruits||mango, leechy, papaya, guava, custard apple, jackfruit and others||mango, leechy, papaya, guava, custard apple, jackfruit and others|
|Access to government reserve||difficult||easy|
|Community forest||6 ha||1 444 ha|
|Forest land per capita||0.0025 ha (25 sq m)||0.34 ha|
|TABLE 10: HOUSEHOLDS BY CASTE AND HAMLET, BRAMAHAN-GORCHHAARI|
|Population: 2 342 / Hhs: 486||Approx. Individuals/Hh: 4.8|
|Community Forest: 6.0 ha||Forest Land per Capita: 0.0025 ha|
|Source: District Forest Office records|
|HAMLET and Ward Numbers|
|Malhanwa (1,2,3)||Hari-Nagar (4,5,6)||Bramahan (7,8)||Gorchhaari (8,9)|
|MUSAHAR (Sadaay, Earthworker)||40||125||-||-||165||34.0%|
|CHAUDHARY (Tharu, usually farmers)||25||75||17||12||129||26.6%|
|MAHATO (Koiri, Vegetable Grower)||20||12||-||39||71||14.6%|
|CHAMAR (Sarki, Cobbler)||-||-||28||11||39||8.0%|
|MIYA (Mussalman, Muslim)||-||-||-||3||3||0.6%|
|MIJHAR (Kami, Blacksmith)||2||-||-||-||2||0.4%|
|MANDAL (Guwar, Milkman)||1||-||-||-||1||0.2%|
|TABLE 11: HOUSEHOLDS BY CASTE ANd hamlet, BAKDHUWAA|
|Population: 4 258 / Hhs 916||Approx. Individuals/Hh: 4.6|
|Community Forest: 1 444.38 ha||Forest Land per Capita: 0.34 ha|
|Source: District Forest Office records|
|HAMLET and Ward Numbers|
|Chhapki (1,2)||Bhimar (3,4,5)||Bakdhuwaa (6)||Mohanpur (7)||Basantapur (8)||Ratwada (8,9)|
|CHAUDHARY (Tharu, usually farmers)||-||-||150||-||-||80||230||25.0%|
|BAHUN/CHHETRI*(Brahmin, Priest Warrior)||3||-||-||65||40||30||138||15.1%|
|MIYA (Mussalman, Muslim)||70||22||-||-||-||-||92||10.0%|
|SAH (Teli, Oilman)||6||18||-||-||-||22||46||5.0%|
|MANDAL (Guwar, Milkman)||6||-||19||-||-||-||25||2.7%|
|PARIYAR (Damai, Tailor)||-||-||-||4||6||-||10||1.0%|
* Recent migrants from the hills
Collection labour is gender/age specific, as indicated by:
|c||children of either sex|
Products consumed during foraging trips while in the forest are marked: "#".
The list gives two product classes: "trees" (gaachh), which in the local taxonomy includes non-tree species, and thatch grass (ghaans). It is not entirely complete, but represents the most common major and minor forest products taken and used or sold in the market by the villagers. Other products (not listed) include birds, animals, reptiles and insects.
|Maithili Term||Labour||Species - Description - Use|
|kaath||M||Many species, mainly -|
|asnaa, saaj||Terminalia tomentosa (or T.alata)|
|jarnaa, jaarain||MFc||Many species - branches and main stems split and cut into 2 to 5-foot lengths for carrying.|
|baans||Several species; various parts used include -|
|M||The culm, for making thatched huts, baskets, posts, mats, etc.|
|F||Branches - for making dry fences.|
|kharh||MF||Fragmites, Saccharum, Erianthus and other species; cut flush to the ground and tied into bundles for carrying; used to roof houses, sheds and stalls|
|saabe||M||Eulaliopsis binata; cut flush to the ground, spread to dry for several days, collected and tied into bundles (or braided into plaits) for carrying; for making rope and sold in the market (used by paper mills for making good quality paper). Work groups often live deep in the forest, sleeping under temporary leaf shelters.|
|bel||Fc||Aegle marmelos; ripe fruit pulp eaten and made into sarbat (a cool drink); sold in market.|
|kusum #||c||Schleichera oleosa; for pickles; ripe fruit eaten.|
|khurur #||MFc||Ficus semecordata; ripe fruit eaten. In emergency cases, the plant collectors subsist on this fruit for several days.|
|jaaum, jaamun #||Fc||Syzgium cumini; ripe fruit eaten and sold in market.|
|gudbheli #||Fc||Buchnania lanzan; ripe fruit eaten.|
|bonbang||c||Sterculia villosa; fruit eaten.|
|sanpath||c||Oroxylum indicum; capsule for native medicine and religious rites.|
|amlesh||MF||Thysanolaena maxima; spike for making brooms.|
|rikhia #||Fc||Emblica officinalis; for sauce, pickles and a sweet called murabba (M); sold in market. Main ingredient in chyavan-prash (N) a renowned ayurvedic medicine.|
|dhorahi #||Fc||Dillenia pentagyna; pickles.|
|chhoichh, banglaahi||c||Capparis zeylaneca; fruit eaten.|
|khajoor #||c||Phoenix acaulis; fruit eaten ripe.|
|banglori, arghon||MF||Cassia fistula; for ayurvedic medicines (specific for constipation); an alcoholic drink is distilled from the fermented pod pulp.|
|FRUIT and BRANCHES:|
|karonaa||Fc||Carissa spinarum; fruit eaten as pickle or ripe; branches for dry fencing.|
|fuldhab||Fc||Woodfordia fruticosa; flowers sold in market for traditional medicine.|
|FLOWERS and FRUITS:|
|baniaan #||FMf||Gardenia turgida; fruit and flower eaten as vegetable.|
|mainhar #||FMf||Xeromphis spinosa; flower eaten in pakoras, a salty recipe; fruit eaten as a vegetable.|
|pidaar #||FMf||Xeromphis uliginosa; flower eaten as pakora; fruit eaten as a vegetable.|
|FLOWERS and SEEDS:|
|korraiya #||FMf||Holarrhena antidysenterica; flower eaten as vegetable; seeds sold in market under the name Indra Jao, used in ayurvedic medicines for dysentery.|
|amati #||M||Antedesma acidium; eaten by thirsty labourers, also made into chatni (a sour paste for pickle).|
|huddu||M||Cycade spp.; the rachis for making house brooms.|
|malhaan||MF||Bauhinia vahlii; leaves are attached to make plates for feasts; bark for rope.|
|goirh latti||M||Ichnocarpus frutescens; for making baskets used by the Musahar caste during earth work.|
|koilaar||Mm||Ficus virens; young shoots for pickles.|
|isargat||M||Rauwolfia serpentina; sold in market, renowned for its anti-hypertension properties.|
|dat karor #||M||Smilax spp.; a vegetable.|
|khamhaaur #||M||Dioscorea belophylla; a vegetable.|
|sataabar, sataabari||M||Asparagus adscendens; sold in the market; used in traditional medicines to aid lactating mothers, also to increase lactation of cows and buffaloes.|
|jangali karela #||M||Phlogacanthus thyrsiflours; green fruit for emergency vegetable for those living temporarily in the forest collecting forest products.|
These 107 species were recorded in the two villages of the tree and land tenure study. The list includes several species of shrub, plantain, climber and bamboo which are classified by Maithili-speakers along with trees (gaachh). See also Appendix B for details about tree use, and C: for other forest species.
The list is in alphabetical order by botanical (latin) name. Common names are given in English (E), Nepali (N) and Maithili (M), followed by Key letters noting the following information:
|Frequency:||Common, Occasional or Rare|
|Source:||Natural or Planted, Indigenous or Exotic|
|Location:||Forest or Village (incl. home compound & farmstead)|
|Villages:||Bg = Bramahan-Gorchhaari, Bd = Bakdhuwaa|
Common uses are noted in priority by villager preference.
Wattle or Acacia (E)
|Fuelwood; recently introduced fast growing exotic species|
Khair (N), Khaair (M)
|House posts, dry fencing, implements (plough shares, tool handles); wood chips boiled down for tannin and for the red paste eaten with betel leaf|
Acacia (E), Babul (N), Babur (M)
|Poles for house posts; dry fencing; implements (ploughs, tool handles); fuelwood.|
Karma or Haldu (N), Karmain (M)
|Furniture, implements (tool handles, plough shares), fuelwood|
Bael (E), Bel (N,M)
|Sacred species for Hindus, therefore not generally used for fuelwood; leaves for Hindu religious worship; wood for making necklace (garland) for religious purposes; edible fruits for cold drink (sarbat N,M); dry fencing (thorny stem); fuelwood (Muslims); implements (plough shares)|
Seto Siris (N), Sirith (M)
|Furniture, implements (tool handles, plough beams), fuelwood|
Custard Apple (E), Sitaphal (N), Aantaa (M)
|Edible fruits; leaves as insecticide against body lice; fuelwood|
Kadamb (N,M), Kadam (M)
|Edible fruits (pickled green or eaten ripe) furniture, implements (tool handles), fuelwood|
|9. Areca catechu
Areca Nut (E), Supadi (N), Supari (M)
|Edible nuts; stems for ridge pieces in huts and gabled roofs|
|10. Artocarpus heterophyllus
Jackfruit (E), Rukh-katahar (N), Katahar (M)
|Edible fruit (ripe and cooked); implements (plough handles); musical drums; furniture|
Badahar (N, M)
|Edible fruits; goat fodder (monsoon); fuelwood and implements (tool handles); fodder by recent settlers from the hills|
Margosa Tree (E), Nim (N,M)
|Toothbrush (from twigs); leafy brush used to fan measles victim; fuelwood; implements (cart/wagon wheels)|
|Edible flower buds (cooked or pickled); leaves for goat fodder; implements (tool handles), fuelwood|
Silk Cotton Tree (E), Simal (N,M)
|Seed floss used for pillow filling; wood used for making minor furniture; flowers sometimes used for making pickle|
Palmyra Palm (E), Taad (N,M)
|Edible fruit; leaves made into fans; juice taped from stem made into alcohol (taadi wine)|
Gayo (N), Gaaja or Kaanji (M)
|Edible fruit; goat fodder (leaves); implements (plough shares), fuelwood|
Palaans (N), Palaas (M)
|Aesthetic value (at time of flowering); fuelwood|
|18. Butea parviflora
Parsa Latti (M)
|Goat fodder; seed for oil. (A large climber)|
|19. Caesalpinia spp.
Thornbush (E), Kandaa (N), Kaant (M)
|Dry, thorny fencing|
|20. Capparis zeylanica
|21. Careya arborea
Kumbhi (N), Kumhi (M)
|Bark for making rope; stem as fuelwood and implements (tool handles)|
|22. Carica papaya
Papaya (E), Mewa (N), Ararnewa (M)
|Edible fruit (eaten ripe or cooked)|
|23. Carissa spinarum
Karonda (N), Karona (M)
|Edible fruit (eaten ripe or pickled); dry fencing, fuelwood|
|24. Casearia elliptica
|25. Cassia fistula
Rajbriksha (N), Arghon or Banglori (M)
|Fruit as traditional medicine (cash crop); leaves for goat fodder; implements (tool handles), fuelwood|
|26. Cassia occidentalis
Tapre (N), Chakorhiya (M)
|Fuelwood for the poor (collected from waysides)|
|Fuelwood (a woody shrub in swampy ponds; extremely rare)|
|28. Citrus spp.
Lemon (E), Nibua (N), Nemo or Nebo (M), Lime (E), Kagati (N,M), Pomelo (E), Thulo Nibua (N), Sankha Drab (M), Citron (E), Jyamire (N), Jameri nebo (M)
|Edible fruits (eaten ripe, or pickled or juiced for vinegar)|
|29. Clerodendrum viscosum
|Twigs as tooth brush; tender leaves as anthelmintic drug|
|30. Cocos nucifera
Coconut Palm (E), Nariwal (N), Narial (M)
|Edible fruits and nuts; palm leaves used for making hand brooms and burned as cooking fuel; stem as fuelwood|
|31. Cordia wallichii
|Implements (tool handles), fuelwood|
|32. Dalbergia sissoo
Sisam or Sissoo (E), Sisau or Sisam(N), Siso (M)
|Timber for construction, furniture, fuelwood, implements (ploughs, yoke, cart wheels); fodder for goats (rarely); lopped branches for fuelwood; trees sometimes planted as savings or security against future contingencies|
Gulmohar (N), Bansibat (M)
|Ornamental flowers and foliage; shade tree; fuelwood|
|34. Dendrocalamus strictus and other spp. & genera.
Bamboo (E), Baans (N,M)
|Culm used in house construction, for posts and for making stall feeding racks, or split and woven into mats and baskets (e.g., grain storage bins; dry leaves for cooking fuel and in potters' kilns (but not brick kilns); branches for dry fencing|
|Live hedges, dry fencing, fuelwood|
|Implements (tool handles), fuelwood|
|37. Erythrina glabrescens
Coral Tree (E), Phaledo (N), Pharhad (M)
|Wooden boxes, fuelwood (low quality); ornamental flowers|
|38. Eucalyptus camaldulensis
Eucalyptus (E), Masla (N,M)
|Fuelwood, light furniture|
Sihundi (N), Lohejam (M)
|Thorny plant used as live fence|
|40. Ficus auriculata
|Planted for fodder by recent settlers from the hills|
|41. Ficus bengalensis
Banyan Tree (E), Bar (N), Bad (M)
|Sacred to Hindus; shade tree for resting platforms (chautaraa N,M, chabutaraa M); fuelwood (due to fuel shortage, esp. in brick kilns, despite traditional prohibition); a "male" tree planted beside "female" Ficus religiosa (Peepul)|
Dumri (N), Dumair or Gulair (M)
|Edible fruit (eaten ripe or cooked); goat fodder; fuelwood, implements (plough shares)|
|43. Ficus religiosa
Peepul (E), Pipal (N), Pipair (M)
|Sacred to Hindus; shade tree for resting platforms; fuelwood (due to fuel shortage, esp. in brick kilns, despite traditional prohibition); a "female" tree planted beside "male" Ficus bengalensis (Banyan)|
|44. Flacourtia indica
|Implements (plough shares, tool handles), fuelwood; goat fodder; dry fencing|
|45. Gardenia turgida
|Dry fencing, fuelwood|
|46. Garuga pinnata
Dabdabe or Ramsinghe (N), Banjimhar (M)
|Poles for building huts and houses; leaves for goat fodder (esp. by recent settlers from the hills)|
|47. Glycosmis pentaphylla
|Fuelwood for the very poor (a weed along roadsides, etc.)|
|48. Gmelina arborea
Gamhari (N), Gamhaair (M)
|Implements (tool handles), furniture, musical drums|
|49. Gossypium arboreum
Cotton Plant (E), Kapas (N), Baang (M)
|Planted around house compound for cotton wool|
|50. Grewia oppositifolia
Bhimal (N), Chichodhi (M)
|Fuelwood; fodder; implements (plough beams)|
|Flowers for ornamental use and religious worship|
|52. Ichnocarpus frutescens
Goirh Latti (M)
|A climber for making baskets by the Musahar caste (earthworkers in road construction and new cultivation)|
|53. Ipomoea carnea
Saruwa, Beyaa or Behaya (N), Karmi (M)
|Live fencing; fuelwood|
|54. Jatropha curcas
Sajiwan (N), Baghandi (M)
|Live fencing; thin branches used for tooth brushes|
|55. Lagerstroemia parviflora
Bot Dhangero (N), Bajhia (M)
|Implements (cart planks), fuelwood, furniture|
|56. Lannea coromandelica
Hallunde or Hallendo (N), Jimhar, Jiyal (M)
|Poles for house posts; leaves as goat fodder|
|57. Lantana camara
Lantana (E), Sutkeri Phul (N), Narangia (M)
|58. Lawsonia alba
Henna Plant (E), Mehandi (N,M)
|Leaves used for decorative coloring of women's hands and feet|
|59. Leucaena leucocephala
Leucaena or Ipil-ipil (E), Ipil-ipil (N), Chah (M)
|Goat fodder; fuelwood, poles|
|60. Litchi chinensis
Leechy (E), Lichi (N,M)
|Edible fruits; fuelwood|
|61. Litsaea glutinosa
|Bark used as poultice for sprains and bruises; fuelwood|
|62. Litsaea salicifolia
|63. Madhuca indica
|Flowers used in making alcohol (raksi); furniture, implements (tool handles, ploughs); fuelwood|
|64. Malvaviscus arboreus
|Planted in flower gardens for show|
|65. Mangifera indica
Mango (E), Aanp (N), Aam (M)
|Edible fruits (eaten ripe or pickled green); furniture, construction materials; fuelwood (esp. for brick kilns); trees sometimes planted as savings or security against future contingencies; leaves in religious worship|
|66. Manilkara hexandra
Khiriya Puriya (M)
|Edible fruits; fuelwood|
|67. Melia azedarach
Bakaino (N), Bakaain (M)
|Fuelwood, cheap furniture; also used as fodder by recent settlers from the hills|
|68. Mellotus philippinensis
Sindure (N), Sunri (M)
|69. Miliusa velutina
|Implements (tool handles), fuelwood|
|70. Mimosa himalayana
Areli Kaant (M)
|Dry fencing, fuelwood|
|71. Mimusops elingi
Maulsari (N), Bhaalsari (M)
|Edible fruits, fragrant flowers for garlands;shade tree; fuelwood|
|72. Mitragyna parvifolia
Tikul (N), Tikuli (M)
|73. Moringa oleifera
Horseradish Tree (E), Sahajan or Sitalchini (N), Munaga, Munga or Sohijan (M)
|Edible fruits (eaten as vegetables); fuelwood; goat fodder|
|74. Musa paradisica
Banana (E), Keraa (N, M)
|Edible fruit (eaten raw ripe or cooked as vegetable); leaves used for plates during village feasts, goat fodder|
|75. Nerium indicum
|Planted in flower gardens for show|
|76. Nyctanthes arbortristis
Night Jasmine (E), Parijaat (N), Singhar (M)
|Fragrant flowers for worship; fuelwood|
|77. Ocimum sanctum
Sacred Basil (E), Tulasi (N, M)
|Planted by Hindus in home area for worship and for use on funeral pyres; leaves used on funeral pyres and treating of colds and other ailments|
|78. Phoenix sylvestris
Wild Date Palm (E), Khajur (N, M)
|Edible fruits, toddy wine; leaves made into mats|
|79. Phyllanthus acidus
|Acidic fruits are pickled (chatni, achar N, M)|
|80. Phyllanthus reticulatus
|Scandent woody perennial, collected by poor people for fuelwood|
|81. Pithecolobium dulce
|Edible fruit (children); fuelwood, live or dry fencing, implements (ploughs); the seed pod resembles jilebi sweet|
|82. Plumeria rubra
Pagoda Tree (E), Motiphul (M)
|Grown in flower gardens for show|
|83. Polyalthia longifolia
|Ornamental, grown for shade and showy crown (leaves almost evergreen); wood for house posts and making minor furniture|
|84. Premna herbacea
Gineri (N), Ganhiaair (M)
|Goat fodder; fuelwood|
|85. Psidium guajava
Guava (E), Amba or Belauti (N), Lataam (M)
|Edible fruits; fuelwood|
|86. Putranjiva roxburghii (Syn. Drypetes roxburghii)
|Ornamental leaves (almost evergreen); seeds for beads of necklaces worn by parents to foil child mortality (sympathetic magic); the name is from Sanskrit putranjiva, literally "may the son have a long life"|
|87. Ricinus communis
Castor (E), Allind (N), Andi or Arari (M)
|Seed oil, cart lubricant; medicinal leaves for compress on sprain and painful muscles|
|88. Sesbania grandiflora
Agasta (N), Akas (M)
|Edible flowers cooked in vegetable pakoras; ornmental plant around houses|
|89. Shorea robusta
Sal (E), Saal or Agraakh (N), Sakhuwa (M)
|Timber for house beams, poles, door and window frames, furniture, implements (plough shares, carts); fuelwood; leaves for plates at feasts; also used for ritually-erected pond posts (jaaith M; see also Syzygium cumini); oleoresin used as incense in Hindu religious ceremonies|
|90. Smilax Zeylanica
Kukurdaino (N), Raamdataun (M)
|Twigs used for toothbrushes|
|91. Sterculia villosa
Odal (N), Baalkundi (M)
|Edible fruit; fuelwood|
|92. Stereospermum suaveolens
Panchpati or Paadri (N), Paandair (M)
|As fodder tree by recent settlers from the hills; wood for tool handles and fuel|
|93. Streblus asper
Khaksi (N), Saahor or Sahoraa (M)
|Thin branches for tooth brushes; fuelwood, implements (plough shares, tool handles); leaves for cattle and goat fodder|
|94. Symplocos chinensis
Lodro or Hakulal (N), Lod (M)
|Goat fodder (leaves); wood for implements (tool handles); fuelwood|
|95. Syzygium cerasoides
Kyamuna (N), Banjaamun (M)
|Edible fruits; fuelwood, implements (plough shares)|
|96. Syzygium cumini
Jaamun (N), Jaaum or Jaamun (M)
|Edible fruits; timber for house beams and pond posts(jaaith M), erected amidst a great Hindu ritual (see also Shorea robusta)|
|97. Tamarindus indica
Tamarind (E), Imili (N), Tetair or Imali (M)
|Edible fruit, pickled; fuelwood, furniture; shade tree|
|98. Tectona grandis
Teak (E), Tik (N,M)
|Timber for construction and making furniture; very rare in the study area|
|99. Thevetia peruviana
Jahar Kanel (M)
|Ornamental flowers grown for show; fruit is highly poisonous but the sweet nectar of the flower is sucked by children|
|100. Tinospora cordifolia
Gurju (N), Gurich or Gurj (M)
|Large climber, stem used in traditional medicine|
|101. Trewia nudiflora
Gutel (N), Pithari (M)
|Implements (tool handles), fuelwood|
|102. Urena lobata
|Fuelwood (a wayside woody plant used mainly by the poor)|
|103. Vitex negundo
Simli (N), Sinuaair (M)
|Live fencing, hedges|
|104. Xeromphis spinosa
Maindal (N), Mainhar Kaant (M)
|Edible fruit, fish poison; implements (plough), dry fencing|
|105. Xeromphis uliginosa
|Edible flower and fruit (eaten as a vegetable); fuelwood|
Bayar (N), Bair (M)
|Edible fruits; dry fencing, fuelwood, implements (ploughs)|
|107. Zizyphus nummularia
Amati Kaant (M)
|Edible fruit (eaten by children); fuelwood, dry fencing|
* Paraal (rice straw) is believed to be chokho ("pure" in the ritual sense). Sukhal gobar ("dried dung") made with paraal is used for making fires for religious purposes, i.e., at times when a priest is called to perform Hindu religious rites (as for a funeral pyre).
** Karsi ("leftovers") burns smokey and hot; used in cattle sheds in summer as an insect repellent, in winter for warmth.
Throughout this report, local Nepali (N or Nep) and Maithili (M or Mtl) terms are used. The system of transliteration from devanagri to roman script is based on Turner (1965) with slight modification. According to Turner's orthography, for example, the c is pronounced like the English "ch" and his ch is pronounced slightly more aspirated, as "chh". To aid the reader we have opted to spell relevant terms more like they are pronounced, hence: our chalan (custom) instead of Turner's calan, and our chhetri (a caste) instead of his chetri. Short and long vowels are shown by single and double letters, respectively, as in dhani (wealthy; short vowel) as opposed to dhaan (paddy rice; long vowel).
See also the dictionaries by Meerendonk (1960) and Carter et al (1989). Many terms (especially Maithili) do not appear in these dictionaries. Many spellings reflect local dialect, and many definitions reflect local usage.
|agahanic||Winter paddy variety.|
|angnai||A 6-10 m space, surrounding the talau or pond, which is never planted.|
|aputali||Private land acquired through legacy.|
|arjit||Acquired ownership of private land.|
|atikraman||Private or government land acquired through encroachment.|
|auns||Summer rice variety.|
|awwal||Highest quality agricultural land.|
|baabaa||Local holy man.|
|baas bitti||Bamboo clumps.|
|baas dith||Home compound.|
|Bahun (Chhetri)||Brahmin priest and warrior caste.|
|baksha patra||Private land acquired through gift.|
|bhabar||Lowland, characterized by porous soil, gravel and boulders.|
|bhitt pakho||Drier field, unsuitable for paddy.|
|bhurra||Finely-ground tobacco dust for smoking.|
|bighas||Upper limit of landholding in the Teria, imposed in the national land reform programme of 1960s. Approximately 17 has.|
|chahaar||Fourth-quality land and the poorest, rarely under cultivation.|
|chalan||Land management according to local custom.|
|chamchaa||Spoon (used in slang to denote a lackey).|
|Chaudhary||Second-largest caste, usually farmers.|
|chautaraas||Raised stone resting place and a common village meeting area.|
|chilim||Hand-pipe, often made of pottery.|
|daan patra||Private land acquired through gift.|
|dagar||Road or path.|
|doyam||Second quality land.|
|gaachh||Generic term for trees, vines, creepers and bamboo.|
|gaachhi||Any tree field, though not always containing fruit-bearing trees.|
|gaddair||Summer rice variety.|
|gamhari||Summer rice variety.|
|gocharan||Land set aside for grazing.|
|graam ban||Community forest.|
|guthi||Hindu temple lands.|
|haal aabaadi||Private or government land acquired through encroachment.|
|idgaah||Muslim prayer ground or cemetery.|
|jaaith||Round wooden post, always consecrated, found in the centre of the talau.|
|jangal||Forest commons, where villagers are allowed to graze cattle and collect fallen wood, but in which cutting is forbidden.|
|kharhoir||Land under thatch grass.|
|kinal||Private land acquired through purchase.|
|kirti||Conversion of private land to commons through meritorious gift.|
|Mahato||Vegetable grower caste, the third largest in the study region.|
|maund||Measure of 40 kg.|
|minaahi||Conversion of private land to commons through tax exemption.|
|minaahi-jamin||Previously cultivated property that has been degraded through natural causes, or which the owner no longer wishes to maintain.|
|mohaar||Outermost perimeter of talau, built of soil excavated from basin.|
|Musahar||Earthworker caste, the lowest but largest in the Terai. Usually employed as agricultural labourers or in construction.|
|niji ban||Private forest.|
|nyam||Land management according to the legal code.|
|painjhaau||Central portion of a talau in which water gathers.|
|paitrik||Private land acquired through patrilineal inheritance.|
|panchayat||Administrative region comprising a number of communities.|
|pradhan pancha||Elected chairman of community council.|
|purdah||Veiling of women.|
|sadak||Road or pathway.|
|sarkaari ban||Government forest.|
|sarkaari jamin||Government reserve.|
|seer||One fourtieth of a maund ( 0.876 kg).|
|sim||Third quality land.|
|sumpieko||Conversion of government land to commons by 'handing over'.|
|talau||A sacred pond of the cleanest water, usually dug as the devotional act of a wealthy sponsor.|
|tarhia gocharan||Mound-shaped grazing land.|
|APO||Associate Professional Officer, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations|
|Bd||Bakdhuwaa Community, Saptari District|
|Bg||Bramahan-Gorchhaari Community, Siraha District|
|CFDD||Community Forestry Development Division|
|CFDP||Community Forestry Development Project|
|cu m||cubic metre|
|DFO||District Forest Office|
|DIECF||Development of Income and Employment through Community Forestry Project|
|DOF||Department of Forests|
|E or Eng||English language|
|FAO||Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations|
|FLCD||Forestry for Local Community Development Progamme, FAO|
|FTP, FTPP||Forests, Trees and People Programme, FAO/SIDA|
|GCP||Government Cooperative Programme|
|GON||Government of Nepal|
|ha||hectare; equiv. to 10 000 sq m, or 2.741 acres|
|IOF||Institute of Forestry (Tribhuvan University)|
|IOF/P||Institute of Forestry Project|
|KKU||Khon Kaen University (Thailand)|
|LTK||Local Technical Knowledge|
|M or Mtl||Maithili language|
|MOF||Ministry of Forests|
|N or Nep||Nepali language|
|RRA||Rapid Rural Appraisal|
|SIDA||Swedish International Development Authority|
|sq m||square metre|
|TCFDP||Terai Community Forestry Development Project|
|UNDP||United Nations Development Programme|
Acharya, M. and Bennett, L. 1981. The rural women of Nepal: an aggregate analysis and summary of 8 village studies. The status of women in Nepal, Vol.2, Part 9. USAID/CEDA. Centre for Economic Development and Administration, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Alexander, F., Shaw, R., and Bandoyopadhyay, J. 1990. Report to the EEC on Doon Valley Integrated Watershed Management Project. European Economic Community, Brussels, Belgium.
Aryal, D., Regmi, R. and Rimal, N. (eds). 1982. Nepal district profile: a district wide socio-techno-economic profile of Nepal. National Research Associates, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Beebe, J. 1987. Rapid appraisal: the evolution of the concept and the definition of issues. Pp. 47-68 in, KKU, Rapid rural appraisal. Proceedings of the 1985 international conference. Rural Systems Research and Farming Systems Research Projects, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Bharati, A. 1963. Pilgrimage in the Indian tradition. History of Religions 3:135-167.
Bhattarai, T.N. 1990. Community forestry development in Nepal. Address to the National Forestry Curriculum Development Workshop, November 29 to December 1, 1990. Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal.
Blair, H.W. and Olpadwala, P.D. 1988. Forestry in development planning: lessons from the rural experience. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A.
Bromley, D.W. and Cernea, M.M. 1989. The management of common property natural resources: some conceptual and operational fallacies. World Bank Discussion Paper No. 57. The World Bank, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.
Bruce, J.W. 1989. Rapid appraisal of tree and land tenure. Community Forestry Note No. 5. FAO/SIDA. Forests, Trees and People Programme, U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy.
Bruce, J.W. and Fortmann, L. 1989. Agroforestry: tenure and incentives. The Land Tenure Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.
Carruthers, I. and Chambers, R. (eds.). 1981. Rapid appraisal for rural development. Agricultural Administration 8:407-422.
Carter, A.S., Malla, Y.B., and Gijsbers R. (eds.). 1989. Forestry word-list: English-Nepali. 3rd ed. Nepal-Australia Forestry Project and Trees, United Mission to Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Cernea, M.M. 1985. Alternative units of social organization sustaining afforestation strategies. Pp. 267-293 in, Cernea, M.M. (ed.), Putting people first: sociological variables in rural development. Oxford University Press, New York, U.S.A.
Chambers, R. 1983. <Rural development: putting the last first. Longman, London, U.K.
Chambers, R. 1987. Shortcut methods in social information gathering for rural development projects. Pp. 33-46 in, KKU, Rapid rural appraisal. Proceedings of the 1985 international conference. Rural Systems Research and Farming Systems Research Projects, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Chambers, R. and Leach, M. 1989. Trees as savings and security for the rural poor. World Development 17(3):329-342.
Chambers, R., Pacey A., and Thrupp, L.A. 1989. Farmer first: farmer innovation and agricultural research. Intermediate Technology Publications, London, U.K.
Dixit, P. 1990. History of agroforestry in the Terai: an overview. Pp. 16-20 in, Agroforestry in the Terai. Seminar proceedings. The Terai Community Forestry Development Project, U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy, and the Department of Forests, Nepal Government, Hetauda, Makwanpur District, Nepal.
Fisher, R.J. and Malla, Y.M. 1987. Forestry work in villages: a guide for field-workers. Technical Note 3/87. Nepal-Australia Forestry Project, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Fortmann, L. and Bruce, J.W. 1988. Whose trees?: proprietary dimensions of forestry. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A.
Fortmann, L. and Riddell, J. 1985. Trees and tenure: an annotated bibliography for foresters and others. The Land Tenure Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wiconsin, U.S.A., and the International Council for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.
FTP Newsletter. 1980. The FTP Programme and its networking activities. No. 8:5. FAO/SIDA. Forests, Trees and People Programme. International Rural Development Center, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Gibbs, C.J.N. 1987. Rapid rural appraisal: an overview of concepts and applications. Pp. 193-206 in, KKU, Rapid rural appraisal. Proceedings of the 1985 international conference. Rural Systems Research and Farming Systems Research Projects, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Grandstaff, S.W. and Grandstaff, T.B. 1987. Semi-structured interviewing by multidisciplinary teams in RRA. Pp. 129-143 in, KKU, Rapid rural appraisal. Proceedings of the 1985 international conference. Rural Systems Research and Farming Systems Research Projects, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Grandstaff, T.B. 1991. A manager's guide to rapid rural appraisal. Community Forestry Note, FAO/SIDA. Forests, Trees and People Programme, U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy. In press.
Grandstaff, T.B. and Grandstaff, S.W. 1987. A conceptual basis for methodological development in rapid rural appraisal. Pp. 69-88 in, KKU, Rapid rural appraisal. Proceedings of the 1985 international conference. Rural Systems Research and Farming Systems Research Projects, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Grandstaff, T.B. and Grandstaff, S.W. 1985. Report on rapid rural appraisal activities. KKU-Ford Rural Systems Research Project, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Haque, M. 1990. Reviewing the curriculum from a departmental angle. Address to the National Forestry Curriculum Development Workshop, November 29 to December 1, 1990. Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal.
IIED. 1989. Proceedings of RRA review workshop, Sussex. RRA Notes No.7. Sustainable Agriculture Programme, International Institute for Environment and Development, London, U.K.
Ingles, A.W. and Gilmour, D.A. 1989. Empowering user groups in community forestry management in Nepal: problems and possibilities. NAFP Discussion Paper. Nepal-Australia Forestry Project, Kathmandu, Nepal.
IOF/P. 1990. National Forestry Curriculum Development Workshop. Proceedings. IOF/Yale/IRG/USAID. Institute of Forestry Project, Pokhara, Nepal.
Joshi, M.R. 1990. Terai region of Nepal: status and agroforestry opportunities. Pp. 5-11 in, Agroforestry in the Terai. Seminar proceedings. The Terai Community Forestry Development Project, U.N. Food and Agriculture Oganization and the Department of Forests, Government of Nepal, Hetauda, Makwanpur District, Nepal.
Joshi, G.M. and Moorkha, S.R. 1987. Nepal district profile: population. National Research Associates, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Kayastha, B.P. 1990. The historical development of the Institute of Forestry. Keynote address to the National Forestry Curriculum Development Workshop, November 20 to December 1, 1990. Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal.
KKU. 1987. Rapid rural appraisal. Proceedings of the 1985 international conference. Rural Systems Research and Farming Systems Research Projects, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Limpinuntana, V. 1987. Conceptual tools for RRA in agrarian society. Pp. 144-173 in, KKU, Rapid rural appraisal. Proceedings of the 1985 international conference. Rural Systems Research and Farming Systems Research Projects, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
McCracken, J.A., Pretty J.N. and Conway, G.R. 1988. An introduction to rapid rural appraisal for agricultural development. Sustainable Agriculture Programme. International Institute for Environment and Development, London, U.K.
Meerendonk, M. 1960. Basic Gurkhali dictionary. Sen Wah Press, Singapore.
Messerschmidt, D.A. 1990a. Forest resource management and local knowledge: an overview of community forestry research in Nepal. A paper presented at the 2nd International Congress on Ethnobiology, International Society for Ethnobiology, October 22-26, 1990, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
Messerschmidt, D.A. 1990b. The uses of anthropology in agro/social forestry R and D: approaches to anthropological forestry. Discussion Paper No. 90/2. IOF/Yale/IRG/ USAID Institute of Forestry Project, Pokhara, Nepal.
Messerschmidt, D.A. 1989. The Hindu pilgrimage to Muktinath, Nepal. Part 1: Natural and supernatural attributes of the sacred field. Part 2: Vaishnava devotees and status reaffirmation. Mountain Research and Development 9(2):89-118.
Messerschmidt, D.A. 1987. Conservation and society in Nepal: traditional forest management and innovative development. Pp. 373-397 in, Little, P. and Horowitz, M. (eds.), Lands at risk in the Third World: local level perspectives. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A.
Messerschmidt, D.A., Gurung, U., Devkota, B., and Katuwal, B. 1984. Gaun sallah: the village dialogue method for local planning in Nepal. Resource Conservation and Utilization Project, for the U.S. Agency for International Development, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Molnar, A. 1989. Community forestry: rapid appraisal. Community Forestry Note No. 3. FAO/SIDA. Forests, Trees and People Programme, U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy.
Nepal. 1990. Operational guidelines for the Commuity Forestry Programme. Community Forestry Division, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Nepal. 1989. Master plan for the forestry sector. Planning Division, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Nepal. 1988a. Forest protection and conservation action plan for Saptari District, 1988-89. Saptari District Forest Office, Department of Forests, Rajbiraj, Saptari District, Nepal.
Nepal. 1988b. Forest protection and conservation action plan for Siraha District, 1988-89. Siraha District Forest Office, Department of Forests, Siraha, Siraha District, Nepal.
Nepal. 1987. Statistical yearbook of Nepal 1987. Central Bureau of Statistics, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Nepal. 1979. Nepal niyam sangraha (Nepal rules collection). Corrected edition. Law Books Management Committee, Ministry of Law and Justice, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Nepal. 1964. Land Act of 1 Mangsir 2021 V.S. (November 1964, and amendments). Ministry of Law and Justice, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Pretty, J. 1989. Editorial. P.3 in, IIED, Proceedings of RRA review workshop, Sussex. RRA Notes No.7. Sustainable Agriculture Programme, International Institute for Environment and Development, London, U.K.
Raintree, J.B. (ed.). 1987. Land, trees and tenure. The Land Tenure Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A., and the International Council for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya.
Raintree, J.B. and Hoskins, M. 1988. Appropriate R and D support for forestry extension. Pp. 24-48 in, RWEDP, Planning forestry extension programmes. Report of a regional expert consultation, May 1988. Rural Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia, Food and Agriculture Organization U.N., Bangkok, Thailand.
Rayachhetry, M., Balla, M.K., Upadhyaya, C., Pokharel, R.K. and Subedi, B.P. 1989. Use of rapid rural appraisal (RRA) techniques in a portion of Mardi Khola (river) watershed of Kaski District. Social Forestry Systems Study Group, Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal.
Rhoades, R.E. 1979. The art of the informal agricultural survey. Social Science Department Training Document 1978-1. International Potato Centre, Lima, Peru.
Stone, L. and Campbell, J.G. 1984. The use and misuse of surveys in international development: an experiment from Nepal. Human Organization 43(1):27-37.
Subedi, B.P. 1989. Fieldtrip observation report: Lahchowk Panchayat (Kaski District). Unpublished. Social Forestry Systems Study Group, Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal.
Subedi, B.P., Das, C.L. and Messerschmidt, D.A. 1990. Indigenous knowledge of tree and forest resources in the eastern Nepal Terai. A paper presented at the 2nd International Congress on Ethnobiology, International Society for Ethnobiology, October 22-26, 1990, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
TCFDP. 1990. Agroforestry in the Terai. Seminar proceedings. Compiled by P. Evans. The Terai Community Forestry Development Project, U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization and Department of Forests, Government of Nepal, Hetauda, Makwanpur District, Nepal.
Turner, R.L. 1931. A comparative and etymological dictionary of the Nepali language. 1965 Edition, with corrections. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, U.K.
Vaidya, Y. 1990. Nutrition baseline survey for the FTP Project, Nepal. Draft report. GCP/NEP/042/SWE. Development of Income and Employment through Community Forestry Project, Lahan, Saptari District, Nepal.
Warren, D.M. and Cashman, K. 1988. Indigenous knowledge for sustainable agriculture and rural development. Gatekeeper Series No. SA10. Sustainable Agriculture Programme, International Institute for Environment and Development, London, U.K.
Warren, D.M., Slikkerveer, L.J. and Titilola, S.O. 1989. Indigenous knowledge systems: implications for agriculture and international development. Studies in Technology and Social Change No. 11. Technology and Social Change Program, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, U.S.A.
Warren, D.M., Brokensha, D.W. and Slikkerveer, L.J. (eds.). 1990. Indigenous knowledge systems: the cultural dimensions of development. Kegan Paul International, London, U.K.
White, K.J. 1988. Terminal report: Commercial Forestry Plantation Development Programme in the Terai. NEP/85/022/A/42/45. Forest Product Development Board, Sagarnath and Nepalganj Projects, Nepal.