This document summarizes research on community adaptation planning (CAP) in Nepal. The research found that while CAP helped build some local capacity and collaboration, it was not fully inclusive or participatory. Specifically: - CAP benefited the community as a whole but less than 10% of funds targeted vulnerable households. Decision-making was dominated by elites. - Local institutions collaborated more due to CAP but links to district and national levels were lacking. - Most households saw CAP as partly successful in empowering locals, but there were concerns about inclusiveness in decision-making and benefit sharing. - To be more effective, CAP needs more inclusive local structures, supportive policies, and approaches that empower vulnerable households in

1. Opportunities and Challenges of Promoting
Climate Change Adaptation at the Local Level:
Case Study of Community Adaptation Planning in
Nepal
Bimal Raj Regmi, Cassandra Star and Sushma Bhattarai
International conference on climate change innovation and
resilience for sustainable livelihoods
14th January, 2015

2. Presentation Outline
 Setting the Context
 Research objectives &
methodology
 Summary of findings
 Conclusion & Way
Forward

3. Conceptualizing CBA & CAP
 Community Based Adaptation (CBA) is an approach has often
been referred to as a bottom-up adaptation approach, which
recognizes that the majority of finance for climate change
adaptation is currently channelled through national governments,
with no assurance that these resources will reach the poorest
and most vulnerable people (Huq & Ried, 2007) .
 Community Adaptation Planning (CAP) is a process through
which the vulnerable and poor households within communities
get involved in assessing their vulnerability, identifying adaptation
deficits and planning for responses and preparedness to deal with
the adverse impacts of climate change (Regmi & Subedi, 2011).

4. Critical gaps in Community Based
Adaptation (CBA)
 What are enabling conditions for ensuring effectiveness
of CBA in practice? (Huq, 2011)
 What kind of policy favors scaling community based adaptation in
Nepal (Ayers, 2012)?
 What are approaches and mechanism suitable for effective
mainstreaming in practice (Label, 2012)?
 How can local level adaptation be effective to address
vulnerability of household and communities (Ayers, 2013)

5. Research Objectives
The major objective of this research is to
identify appropriate and effective
mechanisms via which communities can
benefit from mainstreaming Community
Based Adaptation in Nepal.

6. Research Methods
 Structured Interview: Households at community level to
assess the benefit of effectiveness of adaptation (N=128)
 Focus Group Discussion: Community members and
implementing agencies: overall effectiveness to the village
(N=9)
 Brainstorming discussion: Community members, NGO,
Government for building consensus on the issue and
mechanism proposed- 1 district level workshop
 Key Informants Interview: community members to map the
general trend of development and climate change
adaptation intervention history (N=9)

7. Research Location

8. Summary of research findings

9. Approach to the assessment
 The effectiveness of CAP was determined by examining
vulnerable household’s and communities’ perception of the
benefits received from the adaptation interventions.
 The project on local adaptation plan of action (LAPA) was
used as case study to look at the effectiveness of CAP.

10. Effectiveness of CAP at local level
Effectiveness*
Reducing Household and Community level risk of
climate change
Medium
Building capacity and institutional strengthening Medium
Benefit sharing mostly for the vulnerable
households
Very low
Enhancing collaboration and coordination among
local stakeholders
Medium
Access to information, knowledge and technology
on climate change
Low
* Based on perception of interviewed households and outcome of FGD, KII and Brainstorming
workshop

11. Climate risk versus Climate Vulnerability
67%3%
20%
7%
3% Drinking Water
and irrigation
Fire equipment
Income generation
activities for poor
Capacity building
Revolving fund
 Most of the investment of CAP is on risk reduction and general
development activities.
 There are issues on technology identification and identifying the right
adaptation practices suitable for dealing with local level vulnerabilities.

12. Capacity building & institutional
strengthening
Village Development
Committee
Effectiveness of adaptation in capacity-building (n=128)
Not
Effective
Less Effective Effective
Very
Effective
Total
Dhungegadi 1 23 32 8 64
Bangesaal 2 15 43 4 64
Total (no) 3 38 75 12 128
Total (%) 2.3 29.7 58.6 9.4 100
 CAP has enhanced the capacity of local forestry institutions like CFUG in CCA
planning.
 VDC and DDC level climate change coordination mechanism were tested.
 However, only CFUG is mobilized at the local level and benefits are also enjoyed
by the executives

13. How Participatory is CAP?
SN Categories of Stakeholders Participation Status of Stakeholders
1 Government officials (at VDC level), Executive
members of Community Forest User Groups,
and VFCC, NGO facilitators, project staff
More engaged in making decision
about the LAPA in terms of both time
and input
2 Invited general members of community groups Consulted and informed (but limited)
3 General members Informed by various means (passive
consultation)
4 Non-group members Neither consulted nor informed
 CAP is more focused at the grass root level and mostly the officials of local bodies
and community institutions.
 Non-group households and majority of the general members of CFUG were
passive in CAP process.
 The linkages with the district and national level is lacking.

14. Access & Benefit sharing
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Dhugegadi Bangesaal
%ofinvestment
Study VDCs
Poor and vulnerable
General Public
 Majority of the benefits of CAP is community oriented and not specific
to the vulnerable households
 Less than 10% of the budget is spent on targeting the poor households
 The poor and vulnerable households have less access to resources

15. Enhancing collaboration & coordination
Others (Political parties, School,
Religious and ethnic organization)
Community
Groups
(Forestry
User Group,
Eco club,
Mothers
group,
cooperative)
Non-Government organization,
Donor Funded Projects and other
social organization
Local
Governmen
t (VDC,
DDC, VDC
and district
line
agencies )
Village Forest
Coordination
Committee
(VFCC)
 Due to CAP interventions, local institutions are coming together. This is important because
it will help in building synergy and reducing tradeoffs.

16. How inclusive & participatory is CAP-
Conclusion
 Although a majority of the households perceived the CAP
intervention was partly successful to empower local, this study
found that there were concerns at the community level with
regards to decision making and benefit sharing.
 Community approach does not necessarily benefit all the poor
and vulnerable households. This is because community based
approaches are constrained by power dynamics and
discriminating social structures where elites and powerful
individual and group dominate the resource use and decision
making.
 The finding argue that in order to achieve climate change
adaptation for the most vulnerable requires a ‘bottom-up’ and
locally inclusive approach to adaptation planning that is sensitive
to the disaggregated nature of climate change vulnerability.

17. Way forward
 The evidence presented has revealed that the ideal enabling
conditions for effective CBA mainstreaming is to have an
inclusive local structure and supportive policies and
governance mechanisms.
 At the household and community levels, there is a need to
develop approaches and mechanisms that enable a more
explicit transfer of power to vulnerable households and place
them at the forefront of decision-making and benefit-sharing.
 One possible avenue to address the governance challenges at
the local level, in the case of Nepal, is to involve meso level
institutions (NGOs, and local and district government) and
higher levels of government more effectively.

18. Acknowledgement
 The organizers of this conference for providing
the opportunity to participate in this event.
 To all the research participants and
particularly communities in the research
areas.
 Prof. Susanne Schech for supervisory
guidance.

19. Thank you