Banko Janakari, Vol. 9, No. 2 Sharma 
Chi-square test was employed mainly to determine the 
significance of the differences but the validation rule often 
required other tests such as the Fisher’s exact test. 

Observations 

“New strategy” : myth or reality 

The study area is undergoing a rapid socio-economic 
transformation due to a strong market influence. The 
following are the major observations that cast doubt over 
the existence of the ‘new strategy’: 

1) Off-farm employment: The out-migration of people, 
due to the off-farm employment opportunities elsewhere, 
is rather rare. Self- employment through Betbans 
(Bamboo-saddler) work, is pursued even by the male 
members, and therefore contributes substantially to the 
farm- household income. However, the market alone does 
not control the adaptation of such works by the 
households. The Brahmin households differ significantly 
from the Paharis in self-employment, 

mainly in the Betbans works. 
2)  Growing cash crop: Only one household in the 
study area, was found growing grapes for sell. No other 
cases of growing cash crops in substantial quantities were 
reported. However, fruit trees, mainly Choerospondias 
axillaris are being increasingly planted for cash income. 
The cereal crops are being still cultivated widely. 

3)  Reducing number or type of animal: A study at 
Ghusel on rural transformation from a subsistence to a 
cash economy reported on the increased pressure on 
ecosystem for increased supply of fodder and firewood 
(Bhatt et al., 1994). However, such a trend did not exist in 
the study area. Only one household was reported raising 
livestock in larger numbers for cash income. The Brahmins 
kept cows for subsistence consumption of milk. The rich 
households, generally keep cows but the poor households 
mostly the Paharis keep goats. Hence, the caste has a 
bearing on livestock-type being raised, though statistically 
not significant, than merely the market signals. 

Table 1: Purchasing of chemical fertiliser using various sources of income (Pearson’s chi-square value in paranthesis) 
Source of off-farm income 

Self em <NRsl000 ployment > 
NRs 1000 

Salary 
< NRs 1000 > NRs 1000 Wage income < NRs 100 > 

NRs 100 < NRs 100 
forestry income 

NRs 100- >NRs300 300 

Annual purchase   % of households    

<NRs 500 23.8 42.9 50.0 16.7 57.1 31.0 21.4 21.4 23.8 
> NRs 500 14.3 19.0 16.7 16.6 9.5 2.4 14.3 7.1 12.0 

(0,202)  (2,625)a  
(0,454)b  (0,675)  

   

Farm source of income 

   

 Cereal crops  Tree crops  Animal husbandry 
 <NRs500 >NRs500  < NRs200 > NRs200  < NRs200 >NRs 
       200 

Annual purchase   % o f h o u s e h o l d s     

<NRs 500 47,6 1 9   45,2 21,4  
57,1 9,5 

>NRs 500 4,8 28,6  19,1 14,3  14,3 19,1 

(12,218)*** ______________________ (0,467) ______________________ (8,400 c)* 

a. Fishers exact test; two tailed significance = 0,165; b. Fisher’s exact test; two tailed significance = 0,650; c. Fisher’s 
exact test: two tailed significance = 0,009; significance level *<0.05 **<0.01 ***<0.001 

Table 2: Purchase of chemical fertiliser from total monthly income, wealth class, caste, literacy and land resource 
 _______ perspectives (Pearson's chi-square value within brackets) ___________________________________________________  

Monthly income (NRs) Wealth Caste Literacy Land resources 
(Literate) Khet Bari (ropani) 

<5000 >5000 Rich Poor No Pahari <2 >2 yes no <4 >4 
 ____________________________________________ Pahari __________________________________________________________  

Annual purchase _____________________________________ % of h o u s e h o l d s  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _   
<NRs 500 52.4 14.3 21.4 42.5 19.1 45.2 42.9 23.8 33.3 33.3 52.4 14.3 
>NRs 500 11.9 21.4 28.6 4.8 21.4 14.3 4.8 28.5 33.4 0 16.7 16.6 

missing 2.4 
 _____________ (7.467)** _____ (10.714)*** ______ (3.385a) ________ (9.355)** ______ (10.714b)** _______ (3.565c) 
a-Fisher’s exact test; two tailed significance = 0,084 b- Fisher’s exact test; two tailed significance = 0,003 
c- Fisher’s exact test; two tailed significance = 0,082 significance level * < .05 ** < .01*** < .001 

11 



 

Sharma Banko Janakari, Vol. 9, No. 2 
significantly more cash in purchasing chemical fertiliser 
than those who do not own Kbet. However, having more 
Bari is not significantly related with the investment on 
chemical fertiliser on Fisher’s exact test (see Table- 2). 

4) Abandoning cultivation of crops that demand high 
labour inputs: The institutionalisation of voluntary 
exchange of labour such as Parma, Nogar, etc. is still 
evident in many parts of Nepal. The Parma is similar to a 
form of traditional work party or mwethya reported from 
Machakos District of Kenya, by which a person is called in 
neighbourhood to help with a special project, such as 
building a hut (Mortimore et al.y 1995). These indigenous 
institutions are as much efficient as the government 
sponsored co-operatives (Messer- schmidt, 1981). Parma 
and similar arrangement do not incur any direct cash to 
the employing household. The rich households having 
substantial cash income are still found abiding by the 
Parma (see Table- 3). Furthermore, if an institution like 
Parma is manifested in an area lying so close to the urban 
Kathmandu, the assumption that the farmers are 
abandoning cultivation of crops that demand high labour 
input, is rather difficult to accept. 

5) Cash income to purchase chemical fertilisers: 
The availability of cash definitely encourages investment 
in chemical fertilisers. However, cash scarcity alone 
cannot be a determinant of application of organic manure 
in fields, which is rather highly influenced by the cultural 
factors. The cash income from all the sources is not 
equally spent on purchasing chemical fertilisers (Table 1). 
The households getting substantial incomes from off- 
farm sources such as self-employment, wage income and 
community forest income, do not invest much in chemical 
fertilisers. The non-farm income from salary may be used 
but is insignificant on the chi- tests. 

Only the households having income mainly from farm 
sources such as the cereals and animal husbandry, 
significantly invest in purchasing the chemical fertiliser. 
However, the households with a substantial farm income 
from the tree crops do not purchase it much. Therefore, 
the assumption that under the marketing influence, use of 
chemical fertiliser increases and pressure on forest 
decreases, may not be true. The use of fertiliser and 
organic manure in fields may also have another 
dimension, for that reason Table-2 presents the purchase 
of chemical fertiliser from wealth, caste and literacy 
perspectives. The rich and more literate households 
significantly purchase more fertiliser than the poor and 
less literate households. (The operational definition of 
literacy is the number of household members having one 
time access to the formal education.) The Pahari 
households purchase less chemical fertilisers than the rest, 
though not in a significant extent. The increased income 
accruing from self-employment, salary and wage, is not 
significantly related with the increased purchase of 
chemical fertiliser, rather it is related to the farm income, 
wealth class and literacy. Furthermore, the households 
owning Khet (low land crop field) invest 

Table 3: The practice of Parma by wealth and caste 

Fuel for cooking  ___________ Wealth class _____  
Rich Poor 

6) Leav
ing marginal land uncultivated: If 
population growth is the cause of agriculture change, not 
the result, and that the principle change is the 
intensification of land use (Boserup, 1965), then the 
marketing influence should intensify the cultivation 
resulting into an intensive land use. This idea is traced 
back to the work of J. H. Thunen, who argues that the 
intensity of land use diminished away from a market 
centre (Hall, 1966). It is noted that farmers in the study 
area are practising multiple cropping of maize with soya 
bean. They have further intensified land use by planting 
Chorespondias axillaris on field boundary. 

 __________________________________ % of households 
 _____________________ Caste _____________________  
Brahmin Pahari 

Yes 31 26.2 14.2 42.9 
No 19 23.8 26.3 16.6 

  

(0.389) 
 

(5.567)* 
Significance level *<0.05 **<0.01 ***<0.001 ; (Pearson’s chi-square value within brackets). 

Table 4: Main source of fuel for cooking by wealth and caste 
% of households 

Fuel for cooking  Wealth class   Caste  

Rich  Poor Brahmin  Pahari 
Firewood 32.5  33.3 21.0  47.4 
Kerosene 17.5  16.7 13.2  18.4 

  

(0.011) 
  

(0.433*) 
 

a: Validation rule: Fisher’s exact test (2-tailed significance = 0.714); (Pearson’s chi-square value within brackets). 

12 



Banko Janakari, Vol. 9, No. 2 Sharma 
7) Sending children to school: These days, there is an 
increasing tendency to send children to schools. 
However, it is a complex decision process that involves a 
lot of factors (Foster, 1980; Shrestha, 1984; Kasaju et al.} 
1985). The economic calculations alone do not bring the 
children to schools. The increased opportunities of cash 
income, in fact, has resulted into early drop-outs of some 
children from schools as reported elsewhere in the 
literature (Hunt, 1978; Foster, 1980). Even the free 
education opportunity is not contributing to reduce the 
early drop-out of the children from schools. 

It is widely claimed that with increased cash income, 
firewood will be either purchased as it will no longer be a 
free commodity or substituted with kerosene (Malla, 
1993). However, it is observed that neither the rich 
households significantly differ from the poor regarding 
the use of fuel for cooking nor this difference is evident 
among the Brahmin and Pahari households (See Table 4). 

Reflections 
On one hand, the Government of Nepal is blamed for 
ignoring the commercial aspects of community forestry 
(Malla, 1993) while on the other, social forestry is 
criticised for omitting the subsistence need of the villagers 
(Monech et al., 1986). The argument for 
commercialisation of community forestry stems from an 
unfounded belief that under strong market influence 
villagers are interested in cash income and not on 
subsistence living. The assumption that under socio-
economic transformation the pressure on the forest 
decreases, is in fact, only a rosy depiction. The depiction 
that ‘uncultivated marginal lands, reduction of livestock, 
stall feeding’ subsequently reduces pressure from 
common forest (Malla, 1993) may not be true because 
some of the critical assumptions are unfounded. 

This study also justifies Foster’s (1980) question regarding 
the role of economic factors on children’s education. 
Some poor Brahmin households are sending children to 
school despite the hardship, whereas some Pahari are 
retaining children in homes so that they can earn income 
through Betbans works. Hence, the decision regarding the 
schooling of children is not determined by the economic 
factors alone. The increased earning opportunity through 
Betbans work results into more dropouts of Pahari 
children from the school and even a free education 
opportunity is unable to retain them. This finding firmly 
agrees with observations elsewhere (Hunt, 1978; Foster, 
1980) and is in contrast with Malla’s (1993) expectation 
that an increased cash earning opportunity will place a 

larger number of children in the school. 

It is also fallacious that under stronger market influence, 
the cultivation pattern shifts from the cereal to the cash 
crop. In principle, this study agrees that with increased 
cash income, people spend much on purchasing chemical 
fertilisers. However, saying that “a strong market 
orientation eventually leads to a reduction of pressure on 
the forest” is deceptive. It is assumed that under strong 
market influence, villagers may face acute labour-scarcity 
and that may encourage for shifting to cash crop (Malla, 
1993). However, it is observed that the Parma is 
institutionalised to cope with labour scarcity during peak 
agriculture season or under severe cash-scarcity. The rich 
and poor households do not differ significantly regarding 
the use of Parma. Nevertheless, the Pahari households 
differ significantly from the rest. Hence, the existence of 
such institutions is culturally determined and the market 
influence may not be decisive. Such institutions may 
accommodate the scarcity of labour therefore, the so 
called ‘new strategy’ may not exist. Thus ‘the rosy 
depiction’ on reducing pressure from the forest (Malla, 
1993) is just a mirage. 

Conclusion 

The so-called new strategy, supposedly adopted by the 
villagers in the wake of market influence, is hardly evident. 
Community forest still plays a significant role in sustaining 
agriculture in the study area. The socio-economic 
transformations under increasing influence of the market 
not necessarily minimise the role of community forest as it 
still contributes substantially in sustaining the subsistence 
living. Many households still depend on community forest 
for basic forest products such as firewood, fodder, 
grasses, and leaf-litters; therefore commercialisation 
should be only at an amble pace. 

Acknowledgements The study, a part of M Sc Thesis 
entitled “The impact of community forestry on income 
distribution” and submitted at Wageningen Agricultural 
University, was funded by a grant from the Netherlands 
Fellowship Programme with additional suppoit from the 
NARMSAP. The author would like to thank the Chairman 
of Kumari Ban FUG Chairman, Mr. B. M. Pahari and all 
the FUG members for their hospitality and co-operation. 

References 

Anonymous 1988. Master plan for forestry sector, main 
report, Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation, 
HMG, Nepal. 

13 



Sharma  _________________________________  
APROSC 1980. Rapid Baseline Survey. 

Agriculture Project Service Centre, Kathmandu, 
Nepal. 

Banskota, M. C. 1989. Hill agriculture and the wider market 
economy: transformation processes and experience of 
the Bagmati in Nepal. ICIMOD Occasional 
Paper No. 10. International Centre for 
Integrated Mountain Development, 
Kathmandu, Nepal. 

Bhatt, N. and Slayter, T. 1994. Land, livestock, and 
livelihoods: changing dynamics of gender, caste, 
and ethnicity in a Nepalese village. Human 
Ecology 22(4): 467-494. 

Boserup, E. 1965 The conditions of agriculture growth:
 the economics of agrarian 
change under population pressure. Allen and 
Unwin. London. 

Foster, P. 1980. Education and social inequality in 
sub_saharan Africa. Journal of modem African 
studies 18: 201-236. 

Hall, P. J. 1966. Von Thunen’s isolated state. 
Oxford: Pergamon Press. 

Hunt, D. M. 1978. Rural poverty and the viability of basic 
needs strategies. ILO, Ganeva. 

Kasaju, P. and Manandhar, T. B. 1985. Impact of parents’ 
literacy on school enrolments and 

 Banko __ Janakari,Vol. 9, No. 2 
retention of children: the case of Nepal. IIEP, 
UNESCO; Paris; France 

Malla, Y. B. 1993. Changing role of the forest resource market: 
an ignored dimension of community forestry. Banko 
Jankari 4(1): 

Manandhar, P. K. 1980. Introduction to policy, legislation and 
programmes of community forestry development in 
Nepal. Community Forestry Development
 Project. 
Kathmandu, Nepal. 

Messerschmidt, D. A. 1981. Nogar and other traditional 
forms of cooperation in Nepal: significance for 
development. Human Organisation 40 (1): 40-47. 

Moench, M. and Bandyopadhyaya, J. 1986. People- forest 
interaction: a neglected parameter in Himalayan 
forest managemet. Mountain Research and 
Development 6 (1): 3-16 

Mortimore, M. and M. Tiffen 1995. Population and 
environment in time perspective: the 
Machakos storey. In Binns, T., (ed.) People and 
environment in Africa. John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 

Shrestha, G. M. 1984. Determinants of educational 
participation in rural Nepal. CERID/WEI project 
(main report) Kathmandu, Nepal. 

14