Assessment of residents' social and economic Wellbeing in conservation resettlement: a case study of Padampur, Chitwan National Park, Nepal.

Abstract

Conservation resettlement is a controversial issue in balancing biological conservation with the people’s social and economic needs. Very few studies have examined the conservation resettlement outcome, and majority of them view resettlement as counterintuitive to the people’s livelihood in the name of biological conservation. This thesis focuses on residents’ responses on social, economic and environmental consequences of a voluntary resettlement. Studies of forced resettlement during the creation and maintenance of national parks and protected areas have found negative socioeconomic consequences for human wellbeing. I investigated residents’ social and economic wellbeing following a citizeninitiated resettlement program in Padampur, Nepal. We found a difference between voluntary and forced resettlement respondents in overall satisfaction as well as evaluation of land quality and employment factors. However, there was no difference in their evaluation of land ownership, housing, physical infrastructure, health, social ties, and support services as having positive outcomes. Most respondents reported being socially and economically better off in the new location. In the future, economic status, food and nutrition, and marginalization of some groups could potentially reduce satisfaction. Residents’ post resettlement economic wellbeing is an important factor in balancing conservation and socioeconomic needs. After the resettlement, we found more residents were engaged in off-farm jobs, micro-enterprises, and physical facilities which were serving their needs. Our findings suggest that considering the following factors in resettlement planning may provide better post resettlement economic wellbeing: a) participatory and bottom up planning; b) fair compensation of physical asset; and c) provision of basic needs for water, and facilities for health and education. I emphasize the need of participatory resettlement planning models, and feel that the results have general applications to resettlement efforts. To see the biological aspects of the resettlement, I assessed the prey abundance in the evacuated area in comparison to the abundance in the park core area. I have chosen Sambar Unit (SU) as a measurement unit to assess the prey abundance. SU is significant with more prey abundance in the evacuated area than the core area of the park. Residents’ perceived biodiversity loss and gain was assessed in both locations (old and new). After the resettlement, residents’ positive perception in restoring wildlife habitat in the old site decreased pressure and decreased human wildlife conflicts. In the new site, I found increased understanding on sustainable utilization of natural resources through community forestry by reducing forest dependency. I suggest the need of periodic monitoring of post resettlement biological and socioeconomic gains to evaluate the long term viability of voluntary resettlement for conservation and residents’ better wellbeing. We suggest future conservation related resettlement consider lessons from the Padampur model.