19/08/2026
๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ฌ๐๐๐ซ๐๐ก๐๐ซ๐ฌ ๐๐ญ ๐๐จ๐
๐๐ง๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ง๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง๐๐ฅ ๐๐จ๐ง๐๐๐ซ๐๐ง๐๐ | ๐๐๐๐-๐๐จ๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ง๐๐ง๐๐, ๐๐จ๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ฒ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ง๐ฌ๐ญ๐ข๐ญ๐ฎ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง (๐๐๐) ๐๐๐ง๐๐ฅ
Aligning with the theme of the panel โ๐๐๐ข๐ฆ๐๐ ๐ข๐ง๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐จ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ฎ๐ง๐ข๐ญ๐ฒ ๐
๐จ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ญ ๐ข๐ง ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐ก๐๐ง๐ ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ญ๐๐ฑ๐ญโ, ๐๐ซ Dil Bahadur Khatri, ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐ฑ๐๐๐ฎ๐ญ๐ข๐ฏ๐ ๐๐ข๐ซ๐๐๐ญ๐จ๐ซ ๐จ๐ ๐๐๐๐, presented on โ๐๐ก๐๐ญ ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ ๐ ๐จ๐จ๐ ๐ฆ๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐ญ๐๐ข๐ง ๐๐จ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ญ? ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐จ๐ซ ๐ฐ๐ก๐จ๐ฆ? ๐๐๐ญ๐ก๐ข๐ง๐ค๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ ๐จ๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ง๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐ฆ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ญ ๐จ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ฆ๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐ญ๐๐ข๐ง ๐๐จ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ญ๐ฌ.โ Building on Dr Sushant Acharyaโs reflection on how operational plans of Nepalโs community forests became inoperable, and Dr Govinda Paudelโs account of growing regret of past forest management, Dr Khatri provided a broader reflection on why contemporary restoration and forest management interventions across Southasia mountains fractured historical forest-people relations.
Using the cases of Nepal, Bhutan and Nilgiris hills, he argued that the domination of technical knowledge and bureaucratic authority in shaping forest governance and management disempowered the local communities affecting their ability to define local forest management priorities. Such reflection suggests rethinking planning and management approach recognising local forest-people relations and local experiential knowledge. He argued that local communities should be able to define what is the good forest for them and be able to shape decisions to achieve such forests. For this, there is a need for more responsive rather than deterministic planning i.e. more useful and implementable forest management planning. Dr Dilli Poudelโs presentation builds this conversation by exploring local aspiration about future of forests management and community forestry in Nepal.