73

Sustainability of Mountain Natural Resources and Biodiversity
in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas
Suresh Raj CHALISE
Fomerly Senior Consultant: Mountain Natural Resource DivisionInternational Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD)
G.P.O. Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal
Present Address: GPO Box 4965, Kathmandu, Nepal.
e-mail: srchalise@mcmail.com.np

Abstract
The Hindu Kush-Himalayas (HKH), the highest mountains of the world, act as water towers for
major Asian rivers and also abodes of great diversity – cultural, climatic and biological. Since the early
1970s deforestation and loss of top soil, as well as their impacts on the livelihood of the poor farmers ofthe HKH mountains, have attracted global attention and debate.
The uncertainty surrounding this debate is further complicated by recent evidence of climatechange impacts in the HKH. The most obvious impacts are widespread deglaciation, as indicated byquickly retreating glaciers, an increasing number of glacial lakes and catastrophic floods caused by the
bursting of such glacial lakes, and a rising trend toward extreme weather events. Such impacts havefurther damaged the natural resource base, particularly land, water and biodiversity resources, increasing poverty in these mountains.
Recent regional initiatives have, however, shown that participation of local communities in managing their natural resources can reverse degradation and ensure sustainable use and conservation of natural resources and biodiversity both within and outside the protected areas, through appropriate policy
incentives.
This paper also discusses lessons in this regard from some recent regional initiatives.
Key words: Biodiversity, climate change impacts, community forestry, conservation, Hindu KushHimalayas, mountain ecosystem, natural resources, Nepal

1. Introduction: the Hindu Kush-Himalayas
The Hindu Kush-Himalayas (HKH), stretching
3,500 km from Afghanistan in the West to Myanmar
in the east is the highest mountain range of the world,
and include Mt. Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest: 8,848 m),
the highest peak of the world, and the Tibetan Plateau,the ‘roof of the world’. The HKH region is spread
across eight countries, viz, Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal and Pakistan(Fig. 1).
The Hindu Kush-Himalayas are often referred to as
the ‘Third Pole’ as they contain the largest mass of ice
and snow outside the earth’s polar regions. These
areas under ice and snow are located at the highest
elevations on earth.
The Hindu Kush-Himalayas together with the
Tibetan Plateau serve as water towers to major Asianrivers, viz, the Indus, the Ganges, the Brahmaputra,
the Mekong, the Yangtze and the Yellow rivers
Global Environmental Research
10(1)/2006: 73-85
printed in Japan(Fig. 2) and are thus the source of fresh water fornearly 150 million people in the mountains and about
three times more in the populous plain downstream
spread across several countries.
These high mountains act as a climatic divide
between the warm, moist southwest monsoon and thecold, dry continental climate of the north. However,changes in altitude and topography within short distances influence local weather and climates immensely,
giving rise to a multitude of micro and meso climatic
regions and diverse ecosystems rich in biodiversity.
The mountain ecosystems of the HKH are veryfragile and vulnerable. The upward lifting due toactive tectonic forces, and the downward pull of gravity on these mountains create an inherently unstable,
high-energy environment which is extremely vulnerable to hazards. Growing evidence of global warming
impacts such as quickly retreating glaciers and increasing frequency of extreme weather events andassociated disastrous floods and landslides have been
©2006 AIRIES

74

Suresh Raj CHALISE

Above 6,000 m.
4,500-6,000 m.
3,500-4,500 m.
2,500-3,500 m.
1,500-2,500 m.
1,000-1,500 m.
500-1,000 m.
Below 500 m.

Fig. 1 The Hundu Kush-Himalayan region.

Fig. 2 Map of six key watersheds.

observed, adding to the problem of management andconservation of the mountain ecosystems.
Culturally the HKH region is a meeting point ofpeople of diverse ethnicity and languages who came
to inhabit these mountains in successive waves of
migration from the northeast and southwest (Gurung,
1984: 203). The intermingling of diverse races andcultures has made these mountains a veritable living
anthropological museum of diverse cultures, languages and religions.
These mountains have also been the place ofpilgrimage, worship and spiritual realisation forpeople of many faiths since time immemorial. Nature
lovers, mountaineers and adventure seekers from allSustainability of Mountain Natural Resources and Biodiversity in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas

over the world have been attracted to these lofty
mountains throughout the ages. Tourism is, therefore,a growing economic opportunity for the mountainpeople, who unfortunately have also been adversely
affected, as these mountains are also the stage for territorial or internal arms conflicts, which have been
increasing in recent years.
Biogeographically most of this region lies in thetransitional zone between the Indo-Malayan andPaleoarctic realms. The eastern Himalayas are also atransitional zone between the Indo-Malayan and
Sino-Himalayan realms. The HKH region is therefore
very richly endowed with biodiversity, which includes
several endemic species of flora and fauna. Indigenous knowledge and management of biodiversity resources by local people have been the principal
sustaining features of biodiversity, which is now eroding fast due to market forces.

2. Biological Diversity and Conservation
Natural biodiversity is very high in the Hindu
Kush-Himalayas. This is due to the fact that the HKH
mountains rise northwards from the Indo-Gangetic
plains towards the Tibetan Plateau in a series of foldsof rising altitudes, from a few hundred metres above
sea level to the highest point on earth, Mt. Sagarmatha(Mt. Everest, 8,848 m a.s.l.), creating four distinct
latitudinal zones of varying altitudes.
• The Siwaliks or outer Himalayas: about 10-50 km
wide, with altitudes below 1,000 m. Densely populated plains in the adjacent south.
• The Middle Mountains or lesser Himalayas; about
50-80 km wide, with altitudes of 1,000-4,000 m. A
region of densely populated middle hills.
• The Higher Himalayas or the Great Hindu KushHimalayan range: about 80-140 km wide, withaltitudes of 4,000-8,000 m and above. A region of
perpetual snow, glaciers and glacial lakes.
• Inner and trans-Himalaya and the Tibetan Plateau:
altitudes above 4,000 m.
These altitudinal zones provide the physical setting
for vertical zonation of climate and vegetation. Hence,
almost all kinds of climates can be found in the HKH,
from tropical and subtropical in the southern lowlands
to temperate, alpine and tundra in the northern highlands of perennial snow. However, the climate of theHKH is dominated by the southwest summer monsoon
which provides precipitation in summer and isstronger in the eastern and central parts than in thewestern part of the HKH. The eastern Himalayas receive very high precipitation (5,000-10,000 mm annually) during the summer monsoon, although winters
can be very dry. The western disturbances, are strong
in the western part of the HKH and important for winter precipitation. However, the influence of the western disturbances is weak in the central and eastern75

parts of the HKH. In general, aridity increases fromeast to west as well as from south to north. Air circulation and incoming radiant energy are influenced byaltitude, aspect and orientation of these complex
mountains, causing wide variations in temperature andprecipitation, and hence in the climate on the local
scale. Such micro-climates, which can differ from one
watershed to the other, are very important ecologically.
Along with differences in the properties of soil androcks in different altitudinal zones, such diversity inmicroclimates has contributed to the existence ofdiverse ecosystems and hence to the rich biodiversityof the HKH.
The HKH mountains have profoundly influenced
the fauna and the flora of the region acting as a barrier
between the north and south and allowing only eastward or westward migration of plants and animals.
The level of endemism is high among the available
species in the HKH. The wild areas of these highmountains, being harsh and inhospitable to humanbeings and also being remotely located from densely
populated areas, have provided protection to manyrare and endangered species. The biodiversity of themountain areas is valuable as it is seen that nearly
50% of the endemic flowering plants found in India
are restricted to the Himalayan region (Khoshoo,1996). This is generally true for the other HKH countries as well.
Many primitive and relict species have been foundin the eastern Himalayas, which are considered tohave been relatively stable physically and climaticallysince the Quaternary epoch and very little eroded byglaciers (Chen, 1990). The eastern Himalayan region,
which includes part of Nepal, Bhutan, northeastern
Indian states and the contiguous areas of Yunnan
Province of China, is also listed as one of the ten ‘hot
spots’ of richest areas for biodiversity in the world’s
threatened tropical forest biotas (Myers, 1988). Many
deep and isolated valleys of the region are exceptionally rich in endemic biotas. In Sikkim (area7,298 km2), of 4,250 plant species, 2,250 (60%) areendemic. In the other Indian part of this region,roughly 2,000 (36%) of the 5,800 plant species areendemic. In Nepal at least 500 (7%) species out of a
total of 7,000 plant species are considered to beendemic. In Bhutan 750 (15%) of the 5,000 species ofplants are considered to be endemic to this region. In
Yunnan, China, some 12,000 species of plants wererecorded and plant endemism rates range from 10% to34%. A conservative estimate for the whole of theeastern Himalayas is set at 9,000 species with 3,500 ofthem being endemic (Myers, 1988; Chalise et al.,1994).
The HKH region is also rich in faunal diversity.
Table 1 gives the number of species of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and fish in the HKH regional countries.
In situ conservation of biodiversity of the HKH region has received good attention and there is a good

76

Suresh Raj CHALISE
Table 1 Faunal diversity in the HKH countries (no. of species).

Country
Afghanistan
Bangladesh
BhutanChina
India
Myanmar
Nepal
Pakistan

Birds
389
632
800
572
2,100
967
844
666

Mammals
119
125
160
499
350
300
181
188

Reptiles
2
154
NA
1186
453
241
100
174

Amphibians
6
23
NA
380
182
75
43
16

Fish
2
736
197
279
NA
NA
185
156

Data Source: Country Review Papers. In: Pei Shengji, ed., (1996) Banking on Biodiversity. Report on the Regional
Consultation on Biodiversity Assessment in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas. Kathmandu: ICIMOD.
Note: NA= information not available.

network of national parks and protected areas of various categories in all the countries. There are 420 protected areas spread across the countries of the HKH,
which occupy about 2.5% of the geographical area ofthe region (Chalise et al., 1994). Although they do not
represent all the ecosystems, they are essential tobiodiversity conservation in the region.
More recently neighbouring countries have cooperated to establish transboundary national parks andwork together for the conservation of biodiversity as
seen between China and Nepal through the establishment of Qomolongma Nature Preserve in the Tibetan
Autonomous Region of China and the Makalu BarunNational Park and Conservation Area of Nepal
through the facilitation of the Mountain Institute(Campbell, 1997: 247). Together with the existing andcontiguous Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Parkand Langtang National Park in Nepal, a large areaaround Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) has been dedicatedto conservation across the two countries.
There are also other encouraging developments
such as the Annapurna Conservation Area Project(ACAP) in Nepal under which protected areas aremanaged by an NGO in partnership with local communities (this is discussed in detail later on), and communal managed local forests in Nepal and India which
contribute significantly to biodiversity conservation in
the region.
Systematic and comprehensive information on
natural biodiversity and agro-biodiversity is, however,still not available. Regional consultations facilitatedby ICIMOD on biodiversity (Pei, 1996) and agrobiodiversity (Partap & Sthapit, 1998) have strongly emphasised the need to develop such a systematic database and information on biodiversity on the nationaland regional levels.
Incorporation of the concerns of agrobiodiversity
into biodiversity conservation poses new challenges.
There is a real need to take a more holistic view of
biodiversity conservation that recognises people’s cultural practices as a positive factor contributing tohigher biodiversity levels.
The need for involving local people and women in
biodiversity conservation is critical. Generally speaking, it is necessary to define clearly, who the real

beneficiaries of conservation in conservation activities
will be and also the clear benefits or compensations
that will be provided to local people in order to help
conservation, although these issues are also complex(Blaikie & Sadeque, 2000). This also applies to biodiversity conservation.

3. Breaking the ‘Myths’ of Himalayan
Environmental Degradation
Much of the global discussion about environmental
degradation in the HKH, which started in the
mid-1970s, focused primarily on ecological concerns,
particularly on deforestation caused by rapidly growing human and animal populations and its negative
impacts on local and regional ecologies and the livelihoods of mountain farmers. Erosion of productive top
soil and sedimentation downstream were considered
the principle causes of poverty and the increase in theextent and magnitude of flood events downstream on
the national and regional scales (Eckholm, 1975,1976). Since then most research work has focused on
quantifying relative roles, impacts, and contributionsof human and natural processes in causing ecologicaland environmental degradation in the region. Thesestudies, which include a sustained and systematic
UNU project on Highland-Lowland Interactive Systems, have clearly demonstrated that relevant and reliable data and information were lacking to deal withthe ‘uncertainty’ in quantifying the impacts of humanand natural processes on increased loss of topsoil on
the mountain slopes, sedimentation and downstream
flooding (Thompson et al., 1986; Ives & Messerli,1989). The ‘Myth’ of a downward spiral of environmental disasters presumed to be unleashed by deforestation caused by indigenous mountain farmers,
which has been widely publicized, has been challenged and discussed extensively by Ives and Messerli(1989) in their book ‘The Himalayan Dilemma.’ They
have argued that the connections between various
parts of the so-called ‘Theory of Himalayan
Degradation’ are untenable, some of which can neither
be proved nor be disproved in terms of the available
body of information. A recent study from Nepal,
where community forestry has been successful in in-Sustainability of Mountain Natural Resources and Biodiversity in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas

creasing forest cover, has reported that the overalllandscape is being steadily afforested at the hands ofthe farmers (Gilmour & Nurse, 1991). The linkage
between deforestation in Nepalese mountains andfloods in Bangladesh has also been questioned andthere is no agreement among experts that deforestation
in uplands is an important contributing factor to
downstream flooding in general (Hofer, 1998).
‘The Himalayan Dilemma’ (Ives & Messerli, 1989)
can be considered as a milestone publication on the
Himalayan environment, which has helped and evenforced people all over the world to reconsider theissue of environmental degradation in the Himalayas
in terms of real facts and figures and not simply interms of plausible but unsubstantiated theories andmyths, which started with the publication of ‘The Losing Ground ’ (Eckholm, 1976). Both publications,however, have helped to raise global attention to the
problems of increasing poverty and environmental andecological degradation in the Himalayas. Since thennational and international programmes for innovative
forestry and watershed management, environmental
conservation, poverty alleviation, and appropriate policy changes have no doubt been intensified in almost
all the countries of the HKH.
Such interventions, however, have not been able toachieve the desired goals, although there are somegood and successful examples of environmental conservation and development in some isolated pockets ofthe HKH countries.

4. Poverty, Outmigration, Women and Ecosystem Degradation in the Hindu KushHimalayas
4.1 Poverty and outmigration
The population has been found to be doubling
every thirty years, and the people in the HKH mountains are becoming poorer day by day. According to a
recent World Bank report (2001), the per capita income of some of the HKH countries is among thelowest in the world.
As these mountains have no significant deposits ofcoal or other mineral resources, except for some localised mining and cement industries, there do not seemto be significant prospects for industrial employment
in the HKH mountains. With lowering agricultural
productivity, particularly due to the non-availability ofirrigation water during the dry period, outmigration ofable bodied men is increasing. There exists a long
tradition of mountain men leaving home for employment in the army and the cities in the plains. In addition mountain people leave their countries in increasing numbers in recent years for employment abroad.
The remittance economy has always been important
for the mountain people of the HKH countries. However, in some countries like Nepal more and moreyoung women also migrate from their village to seek
new opportunities in the cities along with their men-77

folk. For example, the Kathmandu-based carpet industries attract a lot of women and men from neighbouring hills and mountains. This new trend of outmigration of both the male and female youth populationfrom the mountains to the national capitals or urban
centres and also to foreign countries has seriously
affected the rural agricultural sector. Outmigration to
emerging urban areas and market towns is also significant due to increased natural hazards in the midhills of
Nepal as shown by a study in the Madi watershed ofcentral Nepal (Khanal, 2001).
4.2 Women and mountain ecosystems
For most parts of the HKH mountains, it can besaid that women are the true managers of their farmlands and forests. As able bodied men tend to leave
home fairly young and return only when they retire,much of the day-to-day management of farmlands anduse of forests in the HKH mountains is carried out by
women. The drudgery of mountain farming has been
passed cleverly by men to their women for a long time.
Furthermore, as sons are considered insurance for oldage. Whereas daughters marry and leave their parents,
sons are prized and receive all the attention for education, food and freedom from household chores, while
girls are discriminated against right from childhood.
In general, therefore, women in the mountains growup with no opportunities even to be literate. However,when they marry, they have to face the predicament ofmanaging the husband’s farm with whatever knowledge and experience they might have gathered in theirparental home. This has been repeated from generation to generation.
Conservation or degradation of mountain ecosystems, whether agricultural or natural, therefore, depends largely upon the ability of women in the mountains to manage them. As the status of women in the
HKH mountains is very low, the first prerequisite forsustainable conservation of the mountains natural resources and biodiversity is to empower women andraise their status so that they have the same access as
men to education, physical development and employment. Unless women understand the importance ofconserving their ecosystem and are skilled enough toconserve, and unless they derive benefits from suchconservation, it will be difficult to improve the healthof the mountain ecosystem or to halt its degradation.

5. Water: the Critical Natural Resource for
the Sustenance of Biodiversity
5.1 Sustainability of Water Resources in the HKH
Sustainability of biodiversity in the HKH mountains will depend largely upon year round availabilityof water for the plant and animal species of its ecosystem. Generally speaking the HKH mountains haveabundant water resources; however, its year roundavailability is a problem in the mountainous regions,
except in the higher Himalayas with altitudes above

78

Suresh Raj CHALISE

4,000 m.
Water supplies in the HKH mountains are seasonal,
mostly from precipitation caused by the southwest
monsoon in summer and the western disturbances in
winter. The influence of the summer monsoon isstrong in the east and diminishes gradually to the west,
being almost insignificant in the Karakoram region.
Similarly, the influence of the western disturbances ispredominant in the west and becomes insignificant in
the east. The influence of the monsoon is essentiallyconfined to the south of the main Himalayan crest.
The northern Trans-Himalayan region and the Tibetan
Plateau are practically dry. In the areas affected by themonsoon, mostly in the central and eastern HKH, precipitation is confined to four months between Juneand September (about 80%) and the remaining months
are practically dry. The eastern Himalayas receive
maximal monsoon precipitation (e.g., Cherapunji,
India; 12,000 mm/year, the world’s highest). In thewestern HKH, precipitation caused by the western
disturbances occurs mostly during four months in winter and early spring (late November to early March).
Such a marked seasonal precipitation pattern greatly
influences water supplies at different times of the year,
even in areas where precipitation is high. Scarcity ofwater is common during the dry periods. Thus, people
in the HKH mountains have had to cope with either‘too much’ or ‘too little’ water at different times of theyear. This seasonal characteristic of precipitation
across the HKH also influences natural hazard eventsin the region, which contribute significantly to landdegradation.
However, precipitation in the western HKH,
trans-Himalayan region and Tibetan Plateau is very
low and these are very arid regions with precipitation
as low as 100 mm per annum. Hence the ecosystems
in the HKH mountains vary widely from west to eastand south to north in terms of aridity and wetness.
As mentioned earlier, this region is the origin ofmajor Asian rivers which have nurtured major civilisations. Table 2 provides annual discharges of theserivers.
There are naturally high hopes for water to transform the economy of the region through its utilization
for power generation, irrigation and flood control. The
hydropower potential of HKH countries is highaccording to the available estimates: the total theoreti-

cal power potential of HKH countries (not including
Afghanistan) is nearly 429,000 MW (Chalise, 2000).
This is a substantial amount and naturally raises highhopes in the region (Verghese, 1990), although few
countries have been able to utilize such hydropower
potential optimally, mainly due to their inability toinvest and collaborate in national and regional power
projects. Political differences have overwhelmed andprevented economic cooperation between countries toundertake large scale regional hydropower projects sofar, although there are some examples of bilateral
cooperation in the region.
The region has suffered major climate-induced disasters in recent years. Consecutive catastrophic monsoon floods occurred in Bangladesh during 1987 and1988; there were floods in the Indus Basin in September 1992; a disaster was caused by floods and debris
flows in south-central Nepal in July 1993; and there
were floods along the Yangtze in 1995 and 1999.
Relating these events to the impacts of climate change
in any given pattern is difficult. It has been claimed
that the Pakistan flood was caused by the changing
strength and timing of summer monsoon incursions
into the Trans-Himalayan region of Karakoram. Thiswas earlier considered to be an event that occurred
every fifty years, although now it has been found tooccur more frequently. A recent analysis of extreme
weather events with precipitation exceeding 200 mm/
24 hr. in Nepal showed a significant increase in such
events during the 1980s compared to the 1970s(Chalise & Khanal, 2002). However, the impact ofclimatic processes, particularly intense rainfall eventsof short duration, on the ecology and environmental
degradation of the mountain ecosystems of the HKH,
has received insufficient attention. A recent study
demonstrates that human processes are more important in micro-basins, whereas natural processes
predominate in macro-basins (Hofer, 1998). It has also
demonstrated that without a better understanding of
the processes occurring on the meso-scale and thelinkages between these processes on different scales, itwill be impossible to ascertain the actual roles ofhuman beings and nature on environmental degradation in the HKH.
Systematic studies have yet to be carried out on
seasonal snow cover in the HKH. One study showsthat the glaciers in this region have been in a general

Table 2 Annual discharges of major Asian rivers.

River
Indus
GangesBrahmaputra
MekongHuang He (Yellow river)
Yangtze

Mean Discharge(m3/sec)
3,850
15,00020,00015,9001,365
35,000Source: Institute of Geography, University of Berne (1998).
Mountains of the World, Water Towers of 21st Century.

Drainage Area
(km2)
1,263,000
1,075,000
940,000
795,000
445,000
1,970,000

Sustainability of Mountain Natural Resources and Biodiversity in the Hindu Kush-Himalayasstate of retreat since AD 1850 (Mayewski & Jeschke,1979). In the Indian and Nepalese Himalayas it has
been observed that glaciers have been retreating more
rapidly in recent years than before (Hasnain, 1999).
This is also evidenced by the recent increase in glaciallake outburst flood (GLOF) events in many countries
in the region.
Generally speaking increased monsoon rainfall, increased precipitation, and the shrinking of areas undersnow, ice and permafrost are the likely impact of climate change in the HKH (Chalise, 1994). These haveserious implications for food production; power generation; water supplies, particularly during the lean
period; and the frequency of natural hazards (floods
and landslides) in the HKH.
Although there are a lot of uncertainties involved
in reliable assessment of global warming impacts on
the water resources of the HKH, there is already
ample evidence that deglaciation is widespread andglaciers are retreating rapidly in the region. As the
Tibetan Plateau and the high Himalayas are found tobe highly sensitive to climate change, a general inference from this evidence indicates a decrease in water
availability in the region particularly during the lean
period, in the not too distant future. This will have adevastating impact on both human and natural communities of the region.
The impact of global warming on the permafrost
areas of the region is another important issue on whichavailable knowledge is very limited.
A lack of water, along with a lack of other natural
resources, leads to increased poverty, the intensification of social discrepancies, the growth of inter-ethnic
tensions, and ultimately, the emergence of armed conflicts (Abdryazakov, 1997). Ecosystem degradation
which is likely to occur in the future due to decreasing
availability of water in the HKH mountains has, therefore, social, economic, and political implications.

6. Eco-Restoration, Biodiversity Conservation and Community Participation
6.1 Lessons from external interventions: national
and international initiatives
During the last three decades or so, all the countries of the HKH have initiated programmes and policies, with some external assistance, for improved
management of natural resources and ecosystem restoration. In fact the agenda of environmental conservation as a global priority was initiated by developed
countries and the HKH countries are also expected toaccord high priority to this agenda.
Broadly speaking, most of the projects, whether
internally or externally funded, had mixed success inachieving the desired goals — ecological restoration
through restoration of forests and poverty alleviationin the HKH mountains. Considering those programmes are concerned mainly with ecosystem andbiodiversity conservation and soil and water conserva-

79tion, failures can be traced to failure of beneficiaries
to be involved or participate in the planning and management of the projects in which decisions are madegenerally at the central level. In many cases such projects seem to have too many externalities — external
ideas and concepts, external expertise, external solutions and above all external funds which depended
largely upon the interest and adhoc decisions ofcentral authorities or donors and in which the real
stakeholders have no influence. With weak national
institutions and lack of sufficient commitment at thenational level, these failures were probably unavoidable in the early years. The sad fallout of these failures
was increased dependency on external assistance andan almost total decline of traditional conservation
practices.
6.2 Community participation: the paradigm shift
During the same decades the development andconservation paradigm has also shifted gradually fromsectoral to integrated and finally to participatory programmes. National policies of the HKH countries
have also given increasing priority to decentralizationin recent years. This has come through the realisationthat without active involvement and participation of
the real stakeholders, which are the beneficiary communities, the desired goals will not be achieved at any
stage of a project/programme cycle. Thus development and conservation projects have now become‘people centric.’ This is a welcome change and expected to ensure long-term sustainability of project
activities.
At the same time non-governmental organisations(NGOs) and social action groups, whether local,
national, or international, have also emerged as important partners in the formulation and implementation ofconservation projects in the region.

7. Regional Initiatives
Some innovative regional initiatives involving
local communities, NGOs and government institutionsin natural resources management, nature conservationand ecosystem restoration have provided good results
during the last decade or so. A few such initiatives arebriefly discussed below.
7.1 ICIMOD and mountain ecosystem conservation
An important regional initiative is the establishment of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) in Nepal in 1983
through the initiative of UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere Programme with the support of the regionalcountries. ICIMOD is the first international centre
devoted to ecologically sound and sustainable development of the mountains with a primary focus in theHKH (ICIMOD, 1998). Since its inception ICIMOD
has contributed to the sustainable development and80Suresh Raj CHALISE

conservation of the mountain ecosystems of the HKH
through its various programme activities, which it
implements in close partnership with the regional
member countries (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan,
China, India, Myanmar, Nepal and Pakistan), participating communities, NGOs and community-basedorganisations.
The secretariats of the Mountain Forum and Asia
Pacific Mountain Network which are global forum
and electronic networks of researchers, academics,
development practitioners, students and others interested in the development of the mountains and themountain people are also located at ICIMOD.
ICIMOD has also been providing a secretariat for aregional network of hydrological research, the HKHFRIEND (Flow Regimes from International Experimental and Network Data), which is one of the eightgroups of UNESCO’s FRIEND project under its International Hydrological Program. Conservation ofmountain ecosystems and sustainability of mountainnatural resources and biodiversity have remained highpriority focal areas for ICIMOD’s initiatives. An innovative project of ICIMOD in this regard is briefly
discussed as an example.
7.2 Rehabilitation of degraded lands in mountainecosystems
A Regional Project for ‘Rehabilitation of Degraded
Lands in Mountain Ecosystems’ was implemented by
ICIMOD in China, India, Pakistan and Nepal to develop a better understanding of the extent and processes underlying land degradation, and to identify
measures for restoring and developing degraded lands
by using options that are field-tested and found to beeconomically, environmentally and socially viable.
This regional project was supported by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada.
The experiences of the Project implemented in the
Kabhre Palanchok District, Nepal, are briefly discussed here.
The Project selected two sites in the Kabhre
Palanchok District in April 1993 in collaboration with
the District Forest Office, after prolonged discussion
and consultation with local community leaders andparticipating communities of both sites. As both sites
had degraded forest lands being used for open grazing
by the local communities, considerable time wasneeded initially to discuss with and convince the communities to agree to social fencing of the planting sites
instead of the traditional barbed wire fencing which
had failed to protect earlier plantations at those sites.
For this they had to keep the animals away and introduce stall-feeding. As stall-feeding was a new concept
and more demanding than free grazing there was aconsiderable scepticism about its success in the beginning. However, the local people were willing to experiment with the idea of ‘social fencing’ and practice‘stall feeding.’ Both sites are located on degradedcommon lands on ‘red soil’ which are considered as

the most degraded lands in the watershed.
The local communities decided to manage the two
project sites as community forests, and forest usergroups were formed at both sites. The sites have beenprotected by them from domestic animal, through social fencing. This was achieved firstly through consensus in the forest user groups involving the majority of
stakeholders, and reinforced by forest watchers employed by the forest user groups. A modified Sloping
Agricultural Land Technology (SALT) (Partap &Watson, 1994) combining nitrogen fixing contour
hedgerows, with tree seedlings planted between therows, was used at the sites. It was probably the firsttime in Nepal that this technology had been applied
for rehabilitation efforts on such a scale with community participation. Plant and fodder species were selected in accordance with the priorities of the participating communities and diverse species, including
locally growing useful species were planted. Operational and financial management of the site was doneby the communities themselves with technical support
from the project. Financial support provided by the
project was transferred to the bank account of each of
the two forest users groups and transparency in financial operation was strictly maintained throughout the
project period (ICIMOD, 1996).
Local community participation in the project-supported activities has been very good due to a collaborative mode of project implementation (Chalise et al.,1995). The formation of forest user groups; support
for a water supply scheme, which the forest usergroups planned and implemented; and capacity building were important in generating and sustaining theinterest of the local people. Other factors that influenced people’s participation include relevancy of thesite and project activities and immediate or perceived
benefits from planted trees and fodder (Karki &Chalise, 1998).
Since the project ended in 1995, the two rehabilitation sites have been included in the Jhikhukhola
Watershed component of the People and Resource
Dynamics Project (PARDYP) of ICIMOD, which wasstarted in 1996 to provide continuity to the earlier
works started under the Rehabilitation Project(ICIMOD, 1999).
Both sites have been taken care of by the local
people even after 1996 and are being monitored under
the PARDYP project. Because of strong community
support and ownership of the project, social fencing
has been fully successful at both sites and there has
not been a single incidence of free grazing to datesince the planting in 1993. In the Himalayan context
this is a great achievement. Stall feeding has not only
been widely accepted in the project areas; it has
almost become a norm elsewhere in the district. Thishas contributed significantly to an increase in green
cover in the common lands of the district and improved ecological health.

Sustainability of Mountain Natural Resources and Biodiversity in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas

The project clearly demonstrated that even themost degraded lands could recover their vegetation
cover and be productive. Participating communities
started getting tangible benefits, such as fodder, fromthe degraded project sites, within a reasonably shortperiod of time. The benefits from ‘social fencing’
could also be observed physically by the stakeholders
in terms of an increase in natural regeneration, which
was found to have increased by 15% to 100% at various sites (Karki & Chalise, 1998). Reduction in soil
and gully erosion through the use of contour hedgerows and simple bio-engineering works, which wereeasy to comprehend for the local people and constructlocally, was significant. The participating communities could observe such positive physical changes
within a few years. Such benefits and physical improvement of the project sites convinced them of theusefulness of the project activities. A very importantfactor which provided the necessary incentive to the
local people to own the project and participate actively in it was the legal framework for the community
forestry program which ensures the sole rights of theparticipating communities, as members of their local
forest user groups (FUGs), to the products and incomes from the existing forests or new plantations.
The FUGs are entitled to 100% of the benefits andincomes from their community forests and they do nothave to share them with the government or any otherinstitution or individual outside the FUGs. Such a legal framework provided the necessary incentive to the
local community, which also included a significant
number of female members, to organize themselves,participate in the project actively, and continue thework even after the withdrawal of project support.
Replication of the project activities could also be seenon the private lands of the local participants. The experience of this project shows that effective participation of the local community is possible in managing
degraded land and forest resources to improve theirstatus and that it can be sustainable if expected benefits are achievable within a reasonable time frame,
provided the legal rights of the participating communities to the income, and benefits generated by
improved management of such resources are clear andwell protected.
7.3 The Annapurna Conservation Area Project(ACAP), Nepal
The Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP)
is an example of the growing role of NGOs in nature
conservation in active partnership with local communities in the region where innovative ideas have led
to encouraging success.
ACAP was started in 1986 by the King Mahendra
Trust for Nature Conservation (KMTNC) a leading
Nepalese NGO with Royal patronage, as a model protected area managed by an NGO in partnership withlocal people (Bunting & Wright, 1985). It has alreadycompleted a successful fourteen years of remarkable81

achievements in the conservation of natural resources
and biodiversity of the ecosystems of the Annapurna
region of central west Nepal. The legal framework forthe management of the conservation area and the mandate to KMTNC to manage the area have been
provided by His Majesty’s Government of Nepal.
This is a pioneer project which has tried to provide
a new concept of protected area management, inwhich the needs of the local people and nature conservation are well integrated in a symbiotic relationshipbetween man and nature. ACAP was established tomitigate the problems of degradation of the fragile
environment of the Annapurna region and improve thequality of life of the local people. It now covers an
area of 7,629 km2, spreading over 55 Village Development Committees in the districts of Manang,Mustang, and large parts of Kaski, Myagdi and
Lamjung of Central and mid-western Nepal involving
about 120,000 inhabitants (KMTNC, 2002).
The three guiding principles on which ACAP wasdesigned are (KMTNC, 1999):
People’s participation: To involve the local people in the planning, decision-making and implementing processes and delegating responsibilities for managing the conservation area. On the grassroots’ level,
the project has helped in the formation of various
users’ committees which facilitate the active participation of the people in all stages of project planning.
Catalysts or match-makers: To act as a matchmaker to meet the needs of the inhabitants and to
manage over 100,000 annual visitors. In addition totourism-related activities, the project attempts to act asa bridge between various international and national
agencies and accesses appropriate expertise and resources to meet local needs.
Sustainability: To ensure that only those projects
and programmes are implemented which people canmanage even after external support is withdrawn. Sustainability has been ensured by encouraging people toparticipate and by making them invest in cash or kindin conservation and development.
The ACAP model has been successful in translating the above-mentioned criteria into action, and a
new scheme of zonation has been introduced, which
recognizes five major use types: biotic/anthropological zones, wilderness zones, protected forest/seasonalgrazing zones, intensive-use zones, and special management zones.
One of the important features of this project is thatof ploughing back the entrance fees of tourists intodevelopment programmes that directly or indirectly
benefit the inhabitants of the conservation area. These
include the introduction of and support for community
forestry and tree planting, installation of mini hydropower plants, training of lodge owners, and supporting
the establishment of lodge owners’ associations andforest user groups.
This project has successfully demonstrated thatconservation areas in the remote mountains of the82

Suresh Raj CHALISEHKH can be managed very well even by NGOs if thelocal communities are closely involved in the planningand management of such areas, with necessary policy
support from the government.
7.4 Nepal’s community forestry programme
The community forestry programme in Nepal grewout of an innovative concept on Community Forestry
developed and implemented successfully in 1973 by
the Chautara Forestry Division in some areas of thetwo districts of Nepal, Sindhu Palchok and Kabhre
Palanchok, as an exercise in ‘productive partnership’in forestry between the local people and His Majesty’s
Government (HMG), Department of Forest (Mahat,
1987). This initiative was further developed and implemented within the same two districts of Nepal,
under the Nepal–Australia Forestry Project (NAFP) in
its Phase II program during 1979 and 1985. According
to Mahat (1987), ‘The Australian side thus joined thepartnership of the local people and HMG Forest
Department in the Chautara Community Forestry
Program.’
The success of the Community Forestry programin Kabhre Palanchok and Sindhu Palchok under
NAFP-II encouraged its expansion to other districts ofthe country and a national program in community forestry was launched in 1987 as part of the newly prepared Master Plan for the Forestry Sector (MPFS)
with the support of the World Bank and other donors.
Under this program, some parts of the national forests
were handed over by the government to the local community for management and used to meet their basic
needs for forest products, such as fodder, fuel-wood,timber and leaf litter for animal bedding and organic
manure, with the proviso that they did not have toshare the income from such community forests withthe government. This program originated and was
focused on the hill forests of the country in the beginning. Presently, it is implemented throughout thecountry and is facilitated by the Forest Act of 1993
and the Forest Rules of 1995 (Kanel, 2004). Initially,such community forests were handed over to the local
political bodies, but later on they were handed over tothe actual users living in close vicinity of such forests.
The users were organized to form local community
forest users’ groups (CFUGs). These CFUGs werelegitimized by the district forest officer (DFO) as
independent, voluntary and self-governing institutions.
Before handing over a forest to the local community,
an Operational Plan for that forest was first preparedjointly by the DFO and the local CFUG for its future
operation and management. The authority assigned to
the DFO and CFUGs over the management of national
forests and the relationship between them and othergovernment institutions, civil society and the private
sector have helped to resolve the problems of exclusion and extraction inherent in classical forest management regimes. This has led to a conducive governance environment leading to improved health of for-ests and enhanced livelihood of the local people. So
far, about 1.1 million hectares of forest lands (25% of
the total) have been handed over to more than 13,000
CFUGs, which constitute about 35% of the total population of Nepal (Kanel, 2004). Out of these 13,000 or
more CFUGs, 648 groups consist only of women.
The community forestry programme has revolutionized the forestry sector in Nepal. Internalising thelessons learnt over time and refining the practices, it
has been very successful in halting the degradation offorests and bringing back the green, particularly in themidhills of Nepal. It has also fulfilled to a large extent
the basic needs of the local community for forest
products. As farming in the midhills is still dependent
heavily on forest products, it has also helped in maintaining, if not increasing, agricultural production inthese areas. There is, however, a general concern inthe midhills that despite the increase in vegetation
cover, for which the CFUG members provide time andlabour voluntarily, economic opportunities provided
by community forestry are still insignificant, although
this situation is changing slowly. A study of income
and expenditure of 1,788 CFUGs from twelve districts,
covering both the Terai and hills, in the year 2002
showed that the total sale of forest products from community forests fetched about US$10 million (747 million Nepali Rupees) (Kanel, 2004).
The formation of CFUGs has successfully brought
the real stakeholders together and also helped in the
devolution of authority and power to the local people.
The incomes generated and benefits provided by the
CFUGs have helped to ensure sustainability of thecommunity forestry program. CFUGs have also filled
the gap of local community institutions and helped
their members become aware of their rights andrealize the strength of being organized for theircommon good in other spheres of activities. CFUGs
and their members are now contributing actively also
to other spheres of community development in theirlocalities all over Nepal. As CFUGs have legal backing and are firmly rooted, they are also likely to be
more sustainable in the long run. Networks of CFUGs
are emerging as an important lobby in Nepal throughthe national networking organization, the Federationof Community Forestry User Groups of Nepal(FECOFUN), and forest user groups’ networks within
districts (Karki & Chalise, 1998).
The main achievements of the community forestry
programme can be said to be improved condition offorests, social mobilisation, income generation forrural development, and institution building at the grassroots level. Presently, nearly 143,000 committee members (of which 35,000 are women), who are elected
representatives of over 13,000 CFUGs (representing
over 35% of Nepal’s population), are making decisions about forests, funds, and other development
activities (Kanel, 2004). As protection and improved
management of community forests have led to an increase in natural regeneration of indigeneous flora andSustainability of Mountain Natural Resources and Biodiversity in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas

fauna, the Community Forestry Program has also contributed significantly to biodiversity conservation in
Nepal. Unfortunatelly, biodiversity conservation has
not received enough attention so far in preparing the
Operational Plans. It is therefore difficult to quantify
the impact of community forestry on biodiversity conservation. This should receive due attention in the
future.
Emerging second generational issues in Nepal’scommunity forestry are primarily concerned with increased representation of women and weaker sectionsof society in the CFUGs and sharing of CFUGs’ income with the government. It has been found that
CFUGs are largely dominated by the local elites andmale members, and representation of women, the poor,and the disadvantaged groups belonging to the minority caste or ethnic groups must be improved so thatthey have a fair share of benefits and equitable participation in the decision making process of CFUGs. How
to achieve this objective is presently under active debate and discussion. With regard to the sharing of income with the government, there has been a major
shift in government policy after the community forestry programme was implemented in the southern
Terai districts. Because of the potential and use of
Terai forests for commercial purposes, the government
has proposed that it will collect 40% of the earnings
from the CFUGs of the Terai districts for programme
implementation. This has raised fresh controversies
and debate, and it is being opposed by the CFUGs
from the Terai districts. Those who advocate revenue
sharing between the government and the CFUGs cite
the joint forest management programme on Social
Forestry of neighbouring India, which was launchedaround the same time as Nepal’s community forestry,during the late 1970s, in which revenue sharing between the government and the local forest user community organisation has been practiced from the very
beginning. However, the debate is still continuing andno consensus seems to be emerging.
Nepal has launched a radical program in community forestry in the HKH region. Its success has attracted the attention and interest of other countries of
the region and outside. It has also attracted wide attention of donors and researchers. A similar programme
was also launched by India on social forestry. A closer
dialogue between HKH countries would be beneficial
for sharing experiences and exchanging information torefine the on-going programs, or to launch new programmes in community forestry in the region(ICIMOD, 1992).

8. Discussion and Conclusions: Sustainability of Mountain Ecosystems in a Changing Environment
Mountain environments in the HKH are changing
rapidly. It is not only the doubling of the population
over the last three decades, but also the changing aspi-

83

rations and priorities of the mountain people. Mountain people are no longer satisfied to remain on thefringes. They also want to have control over their resources, whether it is water, forests or wildlife. In
short, they want to have the power and authority to
decide on how their environmental resources should
be used and are no longer willing to let a central
authority or an external agency decide on it. Given the
chance and necessary support, as discussed in some of
the regional examples earlier, they have shown theirability to manage their resources wisely and sustainably and are even willing to bear inconveniences orhardship to improve the health of their ecosystems.
They certainly need help and they are seeking help
from their governments or external donor agencies oracademic bodies to develop their capacities in termsof both knowledge and skill to be able to manage theirenvironment and use their natural resources sustainably in order to improve the conditions of their livelihoods and economic status.
Obviously, conflicts are on the rise in the mountains. They are no longer confined to territorial conflicts between nations. More and more, these conflicts
are within the countries, between the mountain people
and central authorities for local autonomy and control
over their natural resources.
Aspirations of the people for a better life and an
honourable place in the national and global arena are
growing fast, because the impacts of globalisation
have also reached the mountains. Telecommunications,satellite TV and internet are no longer unknown in themountains and the latest lifestyles and entertainmentof contemporary western life have reached even themost remote mountain households in the HKH. The
impacts of these have been unprecedented. The oldorder and traditions are crumbling fast and people in
the HKH mountains want to leapfrog from their nearmedieval life and traditions to the contemporary lifeof the 21st century.
Mountain environments are also changing in the
HKH due to the impacts of global warming (Chalise,1994). Studies from Nepal have shown an increasing
trend in extreme weather events (Chalise & Khanal,
2002) and warming of air temperatures (Shrestha et al.,1999) in recent years. Deglaciation, retreating glaciers,
an increasing number of glacial lakes and increasing
events of glacial lake outburst floods have also beenreported in some countries of the HKH (Ives, 1986;
Hasnain, 1999; ICIMOD/UNEP, 2001a, b). These
indicate growing impacts of global warming in theregion, despite some uncertainties and difficulties inquantifying such impacts. It is certain that suchchanges are going to affect the ecosystems of thesehighest mountains profoundly in the coming years.
It is also seen that most of the generalisation on thestate of HKH ecosystems is still based on short-term
research and insufficient data. A longer term approachfor systematic research on human and natural processes affecting the ecosystems is essential for dealing84

Suresh Raj CHALISE

with the known and new uncertainties that are impacting or are likely to impact on the ecosystems of thesemountains overwhelmingly.
In the past, dissemination of success stories, ideas,
knowledge and skills in the mountains was seriously
hindered by the lack of communication facilities. In
this age of the Internet, such hindrances are no longer
insurmountable. The use of the Internet to disseminate
the lessons from successes and failures as well as forthe transfer of knowledge, technology and skills
should be fully utilised. There are already some regional initiatives in this regard such as those of
ICIMOD, which should be encouraged with appropriate support.
It is clear to all concerned what needs to be done,
but the vexing question is how it should be or can bedone and who should be doing it. In the final analysis,
sustainability of natural resources and biodiversity ofthese mountains depends upon the willingness andability of the people in these mountains to manage
their resources sustainably. Even if conservation ofmountain ecosystems and natural resources is a global
agenda, the challenge lies in making it an agenda alsoof the marginalised and poor mountain people. Unlessthat happens, sustainability of natural resources andbiodiversity in the HKH mountains will remain questionable.
Both the human and natural environments of theHKH mountains are poised to undergo dramaticchanges. These changes will be rapid and are difficult
to predict. Sustainability of mountain natural resources and biodiversity must be considered by taking
into account the possible impacts of such rapidlychanging human and natural environments of the
HKH.

Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank his colleagues
Anupam Bhatia, Mandira S. Shrestha, Bhuvaneshwor
Shrestha, from ICIMOD and Narendra R. Khanalfrom Central Department of Geography, Tribhuvan
University, Kathmandu for their help in the preparation of this paper. Thanks are also due to Mr. Govinda
Shrestha, Secretary, Mountain Natural Resources
Division, ICIMOD for his secretarial assistance in the
preparation of this paper.

References
Abdryazakov, I. (1997) Statement of the 19th Special Sessionof the UN General Assembly dedicated to the Overall Review and Appraisal of Agenda 21, 22 June 1997, New York.
Blaikie, P.M. and S.Z. Sadeque (2000) Policy in High Places:
Environment and Development in the Himalayan Region.
ICIMOD, Kathmandu, pp. 163-164.
Bunting, B.W. and M.R. Wright (1985) Annapurna National
Park: The Nepal Plan for Joining Human Values and Conser-

vation of a Mountain Ecosystem. In: J.A. McNeely, J.W.
Thorsell and S.R. Chalise, eds., People and Protected Areasin the Hindu Kush-Himalayas, KMTNC/ICIMOD,
Kathmandu, pp. 63-69.
Campbell, J.G. (1997) Protected Areas around Mt. Everest In:
B. Messerli and J.D. Ives, eds., Mountains of the World: A
global priority, The Panthenon Publishing Group, CarnforthUK, p. 247.
Chalise, S.R. (1994) Mountain Environment and Climate
Change in the Hindu Kush-Himalaya. In: M. Beniston, ed.,Mountain Environments in Changing Climates, Routledge,
London, pp. 382-404.
Chalise, S.R. (2000) Water Resource Management in the HKH:
An Overview. In: M. Banskota and S.R. Chalise, eds., Watersof Life, International Centre for Integrated Mountain
Development (ICIMOD), Kathmandu, pp. 11-25.
Chalise, S.R., S. Karki and B.G. Shrestha (1995) Rehabilitationof Degraded Lands in Mountain Ecosystems Project: Nepal
Site II, Kabhre Palanchok, Final Report: Phase I (April
1993-October 1995). ICIMOD, Kathmandu. (unpublished)
Chalise, S.R. and N.R. Khanal (2002) Recent Extreme Weather
Events in the Nepal Himalayas. The Extremes of the Extremes: Extraordinary Floods (Proceedings of a Symposium
held at Reykjavik, Iceland, July 2000). IAHS Publ, No. 271,
pp. 141-146.
Chalise, S.R., S. Pei, B. Bhatta, P.B. Shah and J.D. Gurung(1994) Natural Resources Management in a Mountain Environment. Mountain Environment and Development: Constraints and Opportunities (Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary Symposium of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, ICIMOD, Kathmandu, 1-78.
Chen Su-Kun (1990) Study on the Evolution and Development
Strategy of the Biological Resources in Southwest China(Paper presented at the Second International Congress of
Ethnobiology, October 22-26, 1990). Kunming, China.
Eckholm, E. (1975) The Deterioration of Mountain Environment. Science, 189: 64-70.
Eckholm, E. (1976) Losing Ground. World Watch Institute,
W.W. Norton & Co. Inc., New York.
Gilmour D.A. and M.C. Nurse (1991) Farmer Initiative in Increasing Tree Cover in Central Nepal. Mountain Researchand Development, 11: 329-337.
Gurung, H. (1984) Nepal: Dimensions of Development.
Sahayogi Press, Kathmandu, p.203.
Hasnain, S.I. (1999) Himalayan Glaciers Hydrology andHydrochemistry. Allied Publishers, New Delhi.
Hofer, T. (1998) Floods in Bangladesh. A Highland-Lowland
Interaction? Geographica Bernaensis G48, Institute of Geography University of Berne, Berne.
ICIMOD (1992) Report of the Seminar on Himalayan Community Forestry. In: J.G. Campbell and J. Denholm, eds.,
Inspirations in Community Forestry. June 1-4, 1992.
ICIMOD, Kathmandu, Nepal.
ICIMOD (1996) Rehabilitation of Degraded Lands in Mountain
Ecosystems in Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region, January 17,
1992 - December 31, 1995, (Final Report submitted to International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada.)
ICIMOD, Kathmandu. (unpublished)
ICIMOD (1998) Mountains 2000 and Beyond. ICIMOD,
Kathmandu.
ICIMOD (1999) People and Resources Dynamics in Mountain
Watersheds of the Hindu Kush Himalaya – PARDYP Annual
Summary Report for 1998. ICIMOD, Kathmandu.
ICIMOD/UNEP (2001a) Inventory of Glaciers, Glacial Lakes
and Glacial Lake Outburst Floods: Monitoring and Early
Warming Systems in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region–Bhutan. In: P.K. Mool, S.R. Bajracharya and S.P. Joshi, eds.,
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.
ICIMOD/UNEP (2001b) Inventory of Glaciers, Glacial Lakes

Sustainability of Mountain Natural Resources and Biodiversity in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas
and Glacial Lake Outburst Floods: Monitoring and Early
Warming Systems in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region–Nepal. In: P.K. Mool, S.R. Bajracharya and S.P. Joshi, eds.,
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.
Ives, J.D. and B. Messerli (1989) The Himalayan Dilemma.
Routledge, London.
Ives, J.D. (1986) Glacial Lake Outburst Floods and Risk Engineering in the Himalaya. ICIMOD Occasional Paper 5.
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.
Kanel, K.R. (2004) Twenty Five Years of Community Forestry:
Contribution to Millenium Development Goals. In: K.R.
Kanel, P. Mathema, B.R. Kandel, D.R. Niraula, A.R. Sharma
and M. Gautam, eds., 25 Years of Community Forestry: Contributing to Millenium Development Goals (Proceedings ofthe Fourth National Workshop on Community Forestry, 4-6
August, 2004). Community Foretry Division Department ofForest, Kathmandu, Nepal, pp. 4-18.
Karki, S. and S.R. Chalise (1998) Improving People’s Participation in Soil Conservation and Sustainable Land Use
through Community Forestry in Nepal. In: H-P. Blume, H.
Eger, E. Fleishhaner, A. Hebel, C. Reij and K.G. Steiner, eds.,
Towards Sustainable Land Use, Vol. II, Advances in Geoecology 31, Reis Kirchen: Catena Verlog GMBH, pp.
1151-1159.
Khanal, N.R. (2001) Ecorogional Study of Land Use and Land
Cover Change and It’s Implications to Farm Households: A
Case of the Madi Watershed (Unpublished paper presented in
the International Symposium on Mountain Agriculture in the
HKH Region, May 21-24, 2001). Mountain Farming Division, ICIMOD, Kathmandu.
Khoshoo, T.N. (1996) Biodiversity in the Indian Himalayas:Conservation and Utilisation. In: S. Pei, ed., Banking on Biodiversity. ICIMOD, Kathmandu, pp. 181-256.
KMTNC (1999) Two Years Retrospective Report 1996/97 &1997/98. King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation/

85

Annapurna Conservation Area Project, Kathmandu.
KMTNC (2002) Two Years of Retrospective Report July 2000
to July 2002. King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation/Annapurna Conservation Area Project, Kathmandu.
Mahat, T.B.S. (1987) Forestry-Farming Linkages in the Mountains, ICIMOD Occasional Paper No.7, ICIMOD,
Kathmandu.
Mayewski, P.A. and P.A. Jeschke (1979) Himalayan andTrans-Himalayan Glacier Fluctuation since AD 812. Arctic
and Alpine Res., 11: 267-287.
Myers, N. (1988) Threatened Biotas: ‘Hot Spots’ in Tropical
Forests. The Environmentalist, 8: 187-208.
Partap, T. and B. Sthapit, eds. (1998) Managing Agrobiodiversity: Farmers Changing Perspectives and Institutional Response in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region, ICIMOD,
Kathmandu.
Partap, T. and Watson (1994) Sloping Agricultural Land
Technology (SALT): A Regenerative Option for Sustainable
Mountain Farming, ICIMOD Occasional Paper No. 23.
ICIMOD, Kathmandu.
Pei, S., ed. (1996) Banking on Biodiversity: Report on the
Regional Consultation on Biodiversity Assessment in the
Hindu Kush-Himalayas, ICIMOD, Kathmandu.
Shrestha, A.B., C.P. Wake, P.A. Mayewski and J.E. Dibb (1999)
Maximum Temperature Trends in the Himalayas and its
Vicinity: an analysis based on temperature records from
Nepal for the period 1971-94. J. Climate, 12: 2775-2786.
The World Bank (2001) World Development Report 2000/
2001: Attacking Poverty. The World Bank/Oxford University
Press, New York, 274-275.
Thompson, M., M. Warburton and T. Hatley (1986) Uncertainty on a Himalayan Scale. Ethnographica, London.
Verghese, B.G. (1990) Waters of Hope: Himalaya-Ganga
Development and Cooperation for a Billion People. Oxford& IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
(Received 15 March 2006, Accepted 30 May 2006)