Annapurna Conservation Area Project Faces Policy Debates Amidst Revenue Sharing Discussions

The Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP) is a familiar name in Nepal's natural conservation and eco-tourism sector. ACAP, which has been practicing community-based conservation methods for the past four decades, has recently seen some policy debates and disputes surface regarding its management structure among federal, provincial, and local governments.

Specifically, the Gandaki Province and local levels are asserting their claims over ACAP's income and resources. This issue appears to be purely policy-related.

There is an intense debate about whether ACAP should remain under the federal government or if the province or local levels should manage it. Currently, as per the federal government's decision, the National Trust for Nature Conservation has been entrusted with the management responsibility of ACAP until the end of Asar, 2085. Fifteen local levels in Gandaki fall within the ACAP area. Gandaki has another conservation area with only one local level. The Manaslu Conservation Area includes the Chumanubri Rural Municipality of Gorkha. Local and provincial governments are seeking a direct role in the income and management of these areas.

In some contexts, there seems to be some ambiguity in understanding the management of conservation areas. There are occasional complaints that ACAP's management hinders local development, but if we compare the situation of the neighboring Dhaulagiri and Annapurna regions, the importance of the management system becomes clear.

There are also accusations that ACAP collected money and did not provide any support to the community.

The geography, biodiversity, and cultural environment of Dhaulagiri and Annapurna are very similar, but the Dhaulagiri region is relatively less prominent in terms of tourism, while the Annapurna region always has high tourist activity. Behind this is the community-based conservation, tourism management, and local capacity building framework that ACAP has adopted for the past 40 years.

Currently, more than 1500 hotels and over 450 homestays are operating in the ACAP area, providing direct employment to more than 5,000 local citizens. The economic transaction from tourism activities in this region is estimated to be over 10 billion rupees annually. This favorable environment has been possible due to the systematic coordination of conservation and tourism.

There are also accusations that ACAP collected money and did not provide any support to the community. It is natural for some stakeholders to be curious about the revenue ACAP collects annually and how it is distributed. To understand financial transparency and reality, one must closely examine the flow of resources collected from this area.

Last year, ACAP earned about 670 million rupees from tourist fees. It paid over 80 million rupees in VAT to the government. Even though it is ACAP, there are many taxes and fees that our organization does not collect. Controlled/special area fees go directly to the federal government's revenue account through the immigration department. Foreign tourists visiting special tourist areas like Upper Mustang, Nar, and Phu used to pay 500 dollars and now pay 10 dollars per day. Including trekking permits, hydropower royalties, conservation area management committees, income from herbs and private timber, and fees, taxes, and duties collected by local levels from natural resources, the direct income has exceeded 1.11 billion rupees.

Narpa Bhumi, a remote rural municipality within this area, earns only 700,000 rupees annually. This shows that the revenue directly collected by the local levels themselves is quite low, making it natural for them to seek a share in tourism fees. However, ACAP has not simply kept the budget it received in its account. A large portion is also invested at the local level.

The process is often delayed because the proposing body does not prepare the environmental study report on time. ACAP's role is to facilitate whether these processes are legal.

We have always prioritized the participation of local communities and representatives in budget and plan formulation. Local conservation area management committees formulate plans in coordination with ward chairpersons. Extensive discussions are also held at the municipal level. We are formulating budgets through coordination. Out of the proposed budget of approximately 450 million rupees for the upcoming year, 260 to 270 million rupees have been recommended from the grassroots level to be spent directly on local plans.

The remaining amount is spent on administrative and mandatory obligations. This has strengthened coordination with local levels in the plan formulation process. We have also recognized the procedural difficulties faced by local levels in development construction. Complaints are often heard that development is stalled due to delays in environmental approval when constructing roads or other infrastructure. However, it must be understood that the legal provisions for Environmental Impact Assessment or Initial Environmental Examination are stipulated by the Environment Protection Act and Regulations, not by ACAP itself.

The process is often delayed because the proposing body does not prepare the environmental study report on time. ACAP's role is to facilitate whether these processes are legal. If ACAP had always been obstructive, how would roads reach Mustang and Manang now? The Sishne cable car and Muktinath cable car are under construction. Such infrastructure is also being built within ACAP. The point is that large projects require many processes to be completed. It should be understood that this is a legal provision rather than something ACAP has done.

There is a clear understanding that the cumbersome system requiring environmental processes similar to large projects for small roads or projects at the local level should be simplified. For this, the Ministry of Forests and Environment needs to improve the regulations.

Along with the improvement of biodiversity and forest areas in our region, the conflict between wildlife and humans has also increased. In the upper regions, snow leopards and leopards kill yaks, sheep, and goats, and in the lower regions, bears and monkeys damage crops and harm people. To manage this, we distributed 11 million rupees as relief for wildlife damage last year alone. ACAP contributes about 8% of its income (about 40 to 50 million rupees) annually to the relief fund of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation.

In addition, to reduce conflict, we have built 80 modern corrals in partnership with local farmers so far, and there are plans to build an additional 25 such corrals in Upper Mustang this year. We are also collaborating with locals on alternative crops that are resistant to monkeys and bears to protect crops. Those who say ACAP only took money and did no work should understand that ACAP is with us, working together with the community. Even now, many locals appreciate ACAP's role. It's not that there are no shortcomings; we are also making improvements. It is because of the contribution and ownership of the local community in conservation that the Annapurna region has reached this height. In line with the spirit of federalism, it is positive that local and provincial governments are seeking partnership in the development and income of this area, but it would not be wise to dismantle the successful conservation model established so far to find a solution. Therefore, the federal government should distribute a certain percentage of the entrance fees and other revenues collected from the ACAP area through policy decisions. This will address the resource needs of the local levels. This matter is included in the regulations that are about to be amended. If ACAP receives 50 percent and the provincial and local levels receive 25 percent each as dividends, everyone will have ownership. The National Parks Act and Environment Protection Regulations should be amended in a timely manner to make the process of environmental approval for small infrastructure construction quick and simple. ACAP should create an environment for working with more coordination with local levels in the construction of roads, drinking water, and other infrastructure, to which we are committed.

Today, the ACAP area is not limited to the narrow scope of traditional natural resource utilization such as timber, firewood, stones, or gravel. We have reached a much higher level and scope of discussion. We have made the distribution of benefits a topic of discussion. At the same time, many are also keenly discussing how to adapt to the global effects of climate change, how to conserve our sensitive Himalayan ecosystems and glaciers, and how to ensure environmental justice. If everyone can understand that conservation and development are not opposing but complementary, such complaints will disappear on their own. We must link economic benefits with the community and local government to make conservation areas sustainable.

Strengthening collaboration with local and provincial governments by making ACAP's management model more people-oriented and transparent is the best option today. By amending the Conservation Act and Regulations in a timely manner to facilitate the local use of stones and gravel, ending the ambiguity in hotel registration procedures, and simplifying the environmental approval process for small development construction works, the relationship between ACAP, local levels, and provincial governments will undoubtedly become more harmonious and result-oriented.

(Based on an interview with K.D. Kadel, Director of the Annapurna Conservation Area Project.)