Introduction:

This case study presents lessons on the Hariyo Ban Program’s work in Nepal to mainstream adaptation into local development planning, and leverage funding for adaptation.

Climate change is affecting people and nature in Nepal, and impacts are increasing as climate change advances and there are more extreme weather events. Major effects to date include impacts on agriculture and livestock from unpredictable monsoons and other rains; increased scarcity of water supplies; and increased risk of floods and landslides. In the longer term, program studies and assessments suggest that there will be major changes to many of Nepal’s forests, ecosystem processes and species, with consequent impacts for socio-economic systems2. Climate vulnerabilities are often exacerbated by non-climate stresses to natural systems, including high subsistence use of forest products, encroachment, forest fire, infrastructure development, poaching, human-wildlife conflict, overgrazing, and invasive species. Underlying causes of these include poverty, increasing demand for land for development purposes, weak enforcement of existing policies, and poor governance.

In light of these challenges, a USAID-funded consortium of four core partner organizations – World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere (CARE), Federation of Community Forestry Users, Nepal (FECOFUN) and the National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC) – with WWF serving as the managing partner – is working with Government and civil society on reducing threats to biodiversity and adverse impacts of climate

MAINSTREAMING ADAPTATION INTO LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING: A REFLECTION FROM THE HARIYO BAN PROGRAM, NEPAL1

Disclaimer: This case is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of WWF Nepal and CARE Nepal and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

WWF Nepal, Hariyo Ban Program PO Box: 7660 Baluwatar, Kathmandu, NepalT: +977 1 4434820, F: +977 1 4438458hariyobanprogram@wwfnepal.org, www.wwfnepal.org/hariyobanprogramHariyo Ban Publication No.: Case Study 063

1 This case study is prepared by Sunil Regmi, Adaptation Coordinator and Judy Oglethorpe, Chief of Party, Hariyo Ban Program, Nepal 2 Ryan Bartlett and Sarah Freeman (2014). Vulnerability Assessment of Chitwan Annapurna Landscape, WWF Nepal, Hariyo Ban Program.

7 Dongges, C, Ojha, J and Chloe Pearse ( 2005). Integrated Rural Accessibility Planning In Nepal. ILO, RATP#13. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/recon/eiip/download/ratp/ratp13.pdf

Lessons learned:

1. The adaptation planning process at local level brings empowerment and poverty reduction, and is not just another plan. The CLACs are pivotal in empowering women and marginalized groups and provide an effective forum for planning and monitoring adaptation activities. The community adaptation plan at community level can be used as a bottom-up planning tool to prepare adaptation plans at higher level (LAPAs) using the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MOFALD) framework of environment friendly local governance (EFLG).

2. Adaptation plans require very different levels of funding, and setting a standard amount per plan is often not appropriate. In many cases Hariyo Ban did not have enough funds for individual plans. Mainstreaming adaptation proved to be a point for coordination and leveraging adaptation funding from VDCs, DDCs and other supporting agencies.

3. Mainstreaming community level adaptation plans into development plans is possible through the regular local development planning cycle. The adaptation plan or its selected activities are shared in the ward citizen forums and discussed thoroughly. After proper prioritization and based on resources available with VDC or Municipality, these adaptation activities are included in the local development. For this, adaptation planning should follow the local development planning 16 steps planning cycle7.

© C

ARE

Nep

al/H

ariy

o Ba

n Pr

ogra

m

© W

WF

Nep

al, H

ariy

o Ba

n Pr

ogra

m/N

abin

Bar

al

change on human and ecological communities. The Hariyo Ban Program works on three core, interwoven components: biodiversity conservation, sustainable landscapes, and climate change adaptation, with livelihoods, governance, and gender and social inclusion being important cross-cutting themes. It operates at various levels in two high-value biodiversity landscapes: Terai Arc Landscape (TAL) and Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape (CHAL), complemented by support to strengthen the enabling policy environment at the national level.

The climate change adaptation (CCA) component works to reduce vulnerability and promote climate adaptation, taking an integrated approach that incorporates both ecosystems and rights based approaches3. For this, common understanding of climate change related issues was developed among stakeholders; a vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning process was piloted and used in 400 communities and 40 village development committee (VDC) areas; participatory vulnerability monitoring was conducted; and support provided for policy creation, amendment and execution to government agencies at various levels.

Problem description:

A major problem that Hariyo Ban encountered was how to ensure that local climate adaptation plans were implemented effectively, and were not just nice documents that collected dust on shelves in the meeting rooms of remote communities. At the start of Hariyo Ban, climate change adaptation was a new theme in Nepal and the approach was cutting-edge, with very little experience in-country, although the impacts of climate change were being felt in different areas. The Climate Change Policy, 2011 and the National Adaptation Programme for Action (NAPA), 2010 had just been released and the National Framework for Local Adaptation Plans was still in the making – planning a process with stand-alone adaptation plans at local level. Vulnerability assessment methods and adaptation planning processes were still to be tested and standardized. At the same time there was an existing local government development planning process which covered multiple sectors but did not have provision for climate adaptation. These two processes were being led by different ministries with no discussion on how to integrate them4. A course was being set to produce local adaptation plans in parallel with the existing development planning process, which was unlikely to be sustainable.

Hariyo Ban faced this reality when the budgets for the adaptation plans it supported in many cases exceeded the seed funding it had allocated for implementation, and often further funding was required over a number of years for effective adaptation. We realized we needed to mainstream adaptation into local development planning, to leverage funding and ensure that climate resilience building and adaptation planning were applied in broader development.

Interventions that led to learning:

Steps that Hariyo Ban took in this learning process are outlined below:

• Training, workshops, tours and exchange visits for government officials, media persons, community members and civil society were conducted extensively at community, district and national levels to promote greater understanding of climate change issues and responses.

• To build capacity for vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning, a cascading training program was implemented, training trainers in government and NGOs who then trained local resource persons (LRPs), who in turn trained community members.

• LRPs supported communities and VDCs to undertake vulnerability assessments and prepare and implement adaptation plans, using CARE’s Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis (CVCA) and Nepal’s National Framework for Local Adaptation Plan for Action (LAPA) guideline, and integrating ecosystem aspects. The effectiveness of adaptation measures was monitored. By the end of the third year, 400 community level adaptation plans and 40 VDC5 level adaptation plans had been prepared.

• Planning at community level enabled the program to ensure that poor and marginalized people, and women, who are often the most vulnerable to climate change, could participate effectively in the process and benefit from

implementation (a special process that established community learning and action centers (CLACs) was often followed before the vulnerability assessments to build capacity of these groups and empower them to participate). Community-level planning also proved beneficial to highlight local vulnerabilities and adaptation actions, since climate vulnerability is often site-specific, with variation in type and degree of vulnerability even between neighboring communities.

• Communities started implementing many of the adaptation plans using seed funding from Hariyo Ban, and sometimes contributing their own funds (e.g. from community forest or buffer zone user group funds). Interventions covered multiple sectors (such as agriculture, water, health, disasters, forests, and infrastructure). However, in many cases this funding was not enough to cover all the activities in the adaptation plan, especially if they included small-scale infrastructure such as check dams, embankments and water supplies.

• Realizing the shortfall in funding and the weak sustainability of many plans, the Program started empowering communities to leverage funding for CAPAs from the VDCs. The Program also worked with VDCs to mainstream key elements of the CAPAs and LAPAs into development plans, helping to make them ‘climate-smart’ and ensure that adaptation would continue into the future.

• At a higher level Hariyo Ban worked to mainstream adaptation into other plans, such as protected area management plans, Manaslu Conservation Area being the pilot protected area. For Manaslu, protected area wardens and district forest officers received climate adaptation training, and WWF’s ‘Flowing Forward’ methodology was followed, with vulnerability assessment, and adaptation planning using scenario planning. No separate adaptation plan was produced; instead resilience building and climate adaptation were mainstreamed directly into the Manaslu management plan as it was being revised.

Successes and failures:

After the first three and half years of project implementation, the following achievements and failures were identified6: Successes

• Conducted workshops on mainstreaming adaptation into local development planning for communities and VDC officials

• Community adaptation plans shared with VDC through ward citizen forums and presented in VDC council for endorsement

• Local resource persons were trained and NRM groups were engaged in adaptation planning and mainstreaming into development plans

• Learning culture on vulnerability and adaptation was promoted and applied across multiple levels

• Local-level capacity on vulnerability and adaptation planning was enhanced

• Resource leverage techniques were tested and operationalized

• Monitoring plans for adaptation activities became an integral part of adaptation plans

• CLACs proved to be a very good entry point and tool for capacity building of poor, vulnerable and socially excluded groups to facilitate their participation in adaptation planning

Failures

• Establishing linkages between adaptation planning and local development planning was challenging and often could not move as planned due to absence of elected local bodies.

• As there is no guidance on how the VDC and DDC should facilitate the mainstreaming process, there was limited scope for including adaptation in local development planning.

• Adaptation requires multidisciplinary inputs and interdisciplinary management, and technical services for adaptation were not adequate.

6 Based on a Hariyo Ban stock-taking exercise on adaptation conducted during 22-24 February 2015 in Pokhara, Nepal

3 Pascal Gerat, et al. (2010). Integrating community and ecosystem based approaches in climate change adaptation responses. Ecosystems and Livelihoods Adaptation Network

http://www.careclimatechange.org/files/adaptation/ELAN_IntegratedApproach_150412.pdf 4 Ministry of Science and Technology (MOSTE) mandated to coordinate adaptation related policy instruments and Ministry of Federal Affairs

and Local development (MOFALD) to implement adaptation in the field5 VDC is lowest administrative unit and covers 9 wards with several villages and settlements