Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Examining caterpillar fungus (Ophiocordyceps sinensis) harvesting and
management practice at Pupal pasture of Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Nepal
Sanjeev Poudel
M.A. Sustainable Development Practice, TERI School of Advanced Studies
2012-14
B.A. Development Studies, Kathmandu University 2006-10
This thesis is presented for the degree of Master of Philosophy – Research
(00710) of The University of Western Australia
UWA School of Agriculture and Environment
Agriculture and Resource Economics
2020
i
THESIS DECLARATION
I, Sanjeev Poudel, certify that:
This thesis has been substantially accomplished during enrolment in this degree.
This thesis does not contain material which has been submitted for the award of
any other degree or diploma in my name, in any university or other tertiary
institution.
In the future, no part of this thesis will be used in a submission in my name, for
any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution without
the prior approval of The University of Western Australia and where applicable,
any partner institution responsible for the joint-award of this degree.
This thesis does not contain any material previously published or written by
another person, except where due reference has been made in the text and,
where relevant, in the Authorship Declaration that follows.
This thesis does not violate or infringe any copyright, trademark, patent, or other
rights whatsoever of any person.
The research involving human data reported in this thesis was assessed and
approved by The University of Western Australia Human Research Ethics
Committee. Approval reference number RA/4/20/5114
The following approvals were obtained prior to commencing the relevant work
described in this thesis: Approval from Department of National Park and Wildlife
Conservation, Nepal and from the local season management committee. This
thesis does not contain work that I have published, nor work under review for
publication.
Signature:
Date: 28/11/2020
ii
ABSTRACT
The caterpillar fungus (Yarsagumba in Nepali) found in the alpine region (3500 m
above sea level) is a main source of livelihood for fungus collectors in the
Himalayas. The caterpillar fungus collection and marketing has high potential
impacts on the socio-economic status of the mountain people. Most of the earlier
studies have taken ecological perspective in studying caterpillar fungus and less
emphasis has been given to determinants of its collection. Taking social-
ecological system’s perspective as an organizing framework, this thesis
examines (a) what social, economic and environmental variables determine the
quantity of Yarsagumba pieces collected in the pasture, and (b) management
practices of the local season management committee in the remote Pupal pasture
of Dhorpatan Hunting reserve. Using a socio-ecological system's perspective, a
survey instrument was developed and implemented among 223 harvesters, two
traders and five community leaders during fungus harvesting period in May-June
2019. The findings suggest that for every extra day a collector spent in the
pasture, the rate of Yarsagumba collection was 1.01 times (1%) greater (95% CI
1.01-1.02). The collectors earned on an average 3090 USD purchasing power
parity (in PPP terms) in cash from Yarsagumba collection per season, with an
average of total expenditure of 736 USD PPP incurred during collection. The
direct cash contribution of caterpillar fungus income was on an average 80% of
their total household income. On average, collectors stay 45 days in the pasture
which is higher than allowed by the national directives on Yarsagumba collection
(30 days). The local management committee has adopted a new management
strategy "one home, one security" to manage the Yarsagumba collection process.
As perceived by collectors, it has reduced the number of distant collectors in the
pasture. This study contributes to explaining the factors that affect volume of
Yarsagumba collection among local collectors; and to assessing community
based natural resource management practices to promote sustainable
management of the Yarsagumba in the Pupal pasture of Dhorpatan Hunting
Reserve in Nepal.
Keywords: Caterpillar fungus, Environmental income, Fungus harvesters,
Himalayan pasture, Livelihood, Ophiocordyceps sinensis, Resource
management
iii
Table of Contents
THESIS DECLARATION ..................................................................................... I
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................ II
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................. IV
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................. V
PREFACE ......................................................................................................... VI
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY .................................... 1
1.1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1 1.2. EXPLAINING YARSAGUMBA DYNAMICS ....................................................... 2 1.3. SETTING THE CONTEXT ............................................................................ 5 1.4. ECONOMICS: YARSAGUMBA AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL INCOME ....................... 6 1.5. GOVERNANCE MECHANISM: MANAGEMENT OF THE CATERPILLAR FUNGUS .... 9 1.6. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ................................................................. 10 1.7. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK....................................................................... 11 1.8. AIM AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY ............................................................... 18 1.9. STUDY SITE, SURVEY METHODS AND DATA ANALYSIS .................................. 19 1.9.1. STUDY SITE ........................................................................................... 19 1.9.2. SURVEY METHODS ................................................................................. 23 1.9.3. DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................... 26 1.10. THESIS LAYOUT ..................................................................................... 26
CHAPTER 2. ECONOMICS OF YARSAGUMBA – HARVESTING PRACTICES ............................................................................................................ 28
2.1. SOCIOECONOMIC AND COLLECTION ATTRIBUTES OF USERS (U2) ................. 28 2.2. YARSAGUMBA INCOME CONTRIBUTION TO HOUSEHOLDS (IMPORTANCE OF RESOURCE (U8)) ................................................................................... 30 2.3. DETERMINANTS OF YARSAGUMBA COLLECTION ......................................... 31 2.4. TRENDS OF HARVEST AND DAYS OF SPENDING DURING THE HARVEST OF YARSAGUMBA IN 3 YEARS (2016-2018) (HISTORY OF USE (U3)) ............... 35 2.5. PRICE AND QUANTITY OF YARSAGUMBA (ECONOMIC VALUE OF RESOURCE UNIT (RU4)) .......................................................................................... 35 2.6. SUMMARY ON THE ECONOMICS OF YARSAGUMBA ...................................... 36
CHAPTER 3. COMMUNITY BASED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES OF YARSAGUMBA IN PUPAL PASTURE ................................................ 37
3.1. COLLECTION PRACTICE IN PUPAL PASTURE: ‘ONE HOME ONE SECURITY’ (GOVERNANCE SYSTEM- COLLECTIVE CHOICE RULES (GS6)) .................... 37 3.2. IMPACT OF THE NEW STRATEGY (SOCIAL CAPITAL (U6) AND LEADERSHIP (U5) ..................................................................................................... 40 3.3. ART OF BEING UNGOVERNED BY RESERVE AUTHORITY (MONITORING AND SANCTIONING PROCESSES (GS8)) .......................................................... 40 3.4. RHETORIC AND REALITY OF THE YARSA DIRECTIVES (OPERATIONAL RULES (GS5) .................................................................................................. 42 3.5. LOCAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE’S FUTURE YARSAGUMBA SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT PLAN (NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION (GS2) ................. 47
iv
3.6. COLLECTORS NEXT YEAR IMPROVEMENT ASPIRATION (SECTOR- PASTURE (RS1) AND USERS) ............................................................................... 47 3.7. SUMMARY OF GOVERNANCE MECHANISM ................................................. 47
CHAPTER 4. CONCLUDING REMARKS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS ....... 49
REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 50
APPENDIX........................................................................................................ 56
ANNEX A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE OF YARSAGUMBA COLLECTORS, 2019 .......... 56 ANNEX B QUESTIONS TO DISCUSS WITH YARSA MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ........ 70 ANNEX C QUESTIONS TO DISCUSS WITH DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL PARK AND
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES............................................................ 74 ANNEX D QUESTION TO DISCUSS WITH YARSAGUMBA VILLAGE TRADERS ............ 78 ANNEX E PHOTOS FROM THE FIELD ................................................................. 81
List of Tables Table 1 Explanation of the SES variables used in the study .............................. 13
Table 2 Interview and focus group discussion conducted in 2019 .................... 23
Table 3 Conversion of NRs to USD PPP ............................................................... 25
Table 4 Summary Statistics ..................................................................................... 28
Table 5 Response and explanatory variables used in statistical analysis ........ 32
Table 6 Results from the negative binomial regression ...................................... 34
Table 7 Trends of harvest and days of spending in the pasture, and price per piece ............................................................................................................. 35 Table 8 Price and Quantity of Yarsagumba in Maikot ......................................... 36
Table 9 National management directives implementation challenges .............. 44
List of Figures Figure 1 Yarsagumba in the ground of Pupal pasture © Kiran Pun, Maikot ...... 3
Figure 2 Yarsagumba sprouting above the ground in the Pupal pasture © Kiran Pun ..................................................................................................... 4
Figure 3 SES Framework Sourced from McGinnis and Ostrom (2014) ........... 12
Figure 4 Map showing Rukum (East) district (Map by Ram Pandit) ................. 21
Figure 5 Map showing study village, pasture and Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve (Map by Uttam Babu Shrestha) ............................................................... 21
Figure 6 Map showing Maikot and Pupal pasture (Map by Uttam Babu Shrestha) .................................................................................................... 22
Figure 7 Putha Uttarganga Rural Municipality (Source: Department of Survey, Nepal) .......................................................................................................... 22
Figure 8 Ranking of expenses from Yarsagumba's income ............................... 31
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I want to express my sincerest gratitude to my supervisors
Dr. Ram Pandit, Dr. Fiona Dempster, and Dr. Uttam Babu Shrestha for their
constant guidance and support throughout this academic journey. I would like
to acknowledge respondents, people of Maikot, officials from Department of
National parks and Wildlife Conservation, Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve
officials, friends of friends whom I met during my field visit who helped to
provide logistical information to conduct my field work. My enumerator team
deserves an appreciation for their support in the field. I want to confirm my
note of thanks to Australia Awards Scholarship that made this journey
possible. Debra Basanovic, student contact officer, is a gem in smooth
transitioning from Nepal to Australia. Christine Hogan, our culture reintegration
facilitator helped a lot in transitioning to Australian society. To the UWA School
of Agriculture and Environment especially, Agricultural and Resource
Economics school (@AREatUWA), my hosts at UWA- Nahal Mavaddat and
Dianna Boykett, supportive friends - Jon S Kaub, my UWA Nepali family,
Dinesh/Srijana Bista family, and Sabina Pandit family in Perth deserve my
gratitude. Generous support from Hilary Wallace and Jeremy Wallace for
proofreading entire thesis is highly acknowledged.
To my mentor, my father, Narayan Prasad Poudel, and mother, Dev Laxmi
Poudel: because I owe it all to you. Salute.I heartily thank my family members
for their constant support without which this voyage would not have been
completed timely. I cannot thank enough my wife Sushmita Dawadi for her
constant and absolute support. In this journey I also became Sankalph’s
father. The family support of my mother Dev Laxmi Poudel and mother-in-law
Shanti Dawadi who provided family support when needed during my thesis
writing. I am indebted to my grandmother Shyam Laxmi Poudel who used to
always encourage to travel rural areas to study poor households, and whose
soul departed on 26th October 2020 while revising the thesis. Last but not the
least, I offer my regards to all of those special people who supported me
directly or indirectly before and during the completion of the research project.
Thanks for all your encouragement! Cheers-Sanjeev
vi
Preface
I conducted my undergraduate thesis study at Tsum valley in April 2010,
a predominately Buddhist region in Manaslu conservation area of Nepal
that lies at an altitude of 3000-3350 meter above sea level. I was
fortunate to live with a local family during the study period. I first observed
transhumance practice, which is where people living in the mountain
region migrate towards a higher elevation for trade, caterpillar fungus
collection and social gatherings during May-June each year. The
inhabitants practiced subsistence farming, animal husbandry and
caterpillar fungus collection as a source of livelihood. At that time, I
realised caterpillar fungus has social, economic, environmental, political,
and institutional dimensions associated with it that is well captured in
social-ecological system framework developed by Elinor Ostrom. The
first question that came into my mind was how much volume of caterpillar
fungus is traded from the Tsum valley and from Nepal? What do these
collectors do with the cash income from the caterpillar fungus, and what
is the impact at household level? What are the determinants of collection
of caterpillar fungus in the pasture? Why don’t they add value to
caterpillar fungus before selling that would fetch them more cash? The
second thought that came to me was how were these indigenous
community managing the caterpillar fungus collection sites? How do they
ensure that they pick the caterpillar fungus in sustainable manner to
ensure they pick next year in similar pattern and amount? How do they
allow access to high altitude pastures to people outside their territory?
Do they benefit from the caterpillar fungus collection? These questions
have stuck in my subconscious mind since then (Source: Field visit to
Tsum valley reflections, 2010). In 2010 there were not any policy and
national directives on ways to harvest caterpillar fungus, these have now
been devised in 2017. In this study, I focus on community-based
governance mechanism of caterpillar fungus collection by local
management committee at pasture level and also examine the
determinants of caterpillar fungus collected in the Pupal pasture.
1
Chapter 1. Introduction and Methodology
1.1. Introduction
Hindu Kush Himalayan (HKH) region supplies major ecosystem goods and services
to 230 million people (Sharma et al., 2019). This region covers eight countries that
include Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Pakistan and
Nepal. Nepal’s entire territory falls within the HKH region. The Tibetan plateau, home
to various endemic medicinal plants is in the HKH region extending to four countries:
China, Bhutan, India and Nepal. In the alpine (3500 m above sea level) pastures of
the plateau, caterpillar fungus (Nepali:Yarsagumba, scientific name: Ophiocordyceps
sinensis), an endemic medicinal plant and common traditional Chinese medicine is a
source of livelihood (environmental income) to the harvesting communities in the
Himalayas. For uniformity, Yarsagumba will be used to refer to caterpillar fungus
hereafter.
Environmental income, or as Inter-governmental Science-Policy Platform on
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has reframed it broadly as nature's
contribution to people (Díaz et al., 2015), is a way to diagnose and understand poverty
(Sjaastad et al., 2005). It works as a safety net and sometimes gap-filler to the forest
resource-dependent communities (Angelsen et al., 2014). Empirical case studies of
17 countries indicated that 22% of income is sourced from wild floras and foods that
were not accounted in the national economy (Vedeld et al., 2007). This study is a case
study of the Himalaya medicinal plant – Yarsagumba a common pool resource found
across the Tibetan plateau. It is one of the prioritized product under Nepal’s National
Trade Integration strategy 2016 (ITC, 2007) with a focus on environmental income and
poverty reduction. Nepal being a second largest supplier of Yarsagumba after China
(Shrestha, 2014), this medicinal plant trade provides direct cash household
environmental income (78%) cushion to impoverished communities harvesting
Yarsagumba and even to those involved in the production network (Timmermann and
Smith-Hall, 2020).
Natural and anthropogenic drivers such as global warming and overharvesting have
put additional stress on the natural habitat of Yarsagumba (Hopping and Lambin,
2018). In recent times, the mountain region has experienced further pressure due to
global warming. The impact of global warming on the Himalaya region has an impact
2
on the local ecosystems, including the availability of Yarsagumba (Shrestha and
Bawa, 2014a, Yan et al., 2017, Hopping and Lambin, 2018). There are field-based
studies on Yarsagumba and medicinal plants in Nepal (Shrestha, 2014, Pant et al.,
2017, Childs and Choedup, 2014, Timmermann and Smith-Hall, 2020, Smith Olsen
and Overgaard Larsen, 2003, Pyakurel et al., 2018, Pouliot et al., 2018, Shrestha et
al., 2019) providing a basis to develop a method to estimate the national- level
economic importance, yet the social and economic variables that determines the
species collection is explored only for Tibetan study sites. This research is a case of
Nepal's Pupal pasture as a study site.
Even though the Yarsagumba extraction is seasonal (May-July each year), the ability
of households to derive benefits from its harvesting is crucial. Different socio-
demographic factors such as age, household size, gender and education of collectors
explain the ability of the households to derive benefits from harvesting the resource.
In this context, the thesis seeks to: a) understand the household factors that determine
the amount of Yarsagumba collected through a case of a resource-dependent
community from Maikot, eastern Rukum; and b) examine the governance mechanism
of Yarsagumba by the local resource management committee. The community-based
management strategies adopted by local indigenous communities on managing the
resource and ways to resolve resource-based conflict are the issues that need
attention.
1.2. Explaining Yarsagumba dynamics
Yarsagumba belongs to Clavicipitaceae family that is categorized under medicinal and
aromatic plants (MAPs) (IUCN Nepal, 2000, Wang and Yao, 2011). During summer
Yarsagumba sprouts over the ground in alpine pastures in a needle-shape form (see
figure 1 and 2). This provides a window for harvesting from May to June (Shrestha et
al., 2010, Stone, 2008, Zhang et al., 2012, Wang and Yao, 2011). The fungus is known
as ‘plant in summer, worm in winter’ (Shrestha et al., 2010, Yeh and Lama, 2013). Due
to its distinctiveness, the fungus has the chemical property of acting as anti-
tumorigenic and anti-ageing (Stone, 2008, Zhu et al., 1998, Wang and Yao, 2011).
This species is also found in Nepal Himalayas, including in the Dhorpatan Hunting
reserve, which is located at the southern slope of Mount Dhaulagiri (Thapa et al.,
2014).
3
The Yarsagumba has been used as traditional medicine for several centuries by
mountainous indigenous communities (Baral et al., 2015, Devkota, 2010, Sigdel et
al., 2017, Shrestha, 2012, Olsen and Larsen, 2003, Winkler, 2008a, Zhang et al., 2012,
Lange, 2006). The evidence traced back to centuries-old traditional Chinese medicine
usage (Shrestha et al., 2010, Zhang et al., 2012, Winkler, 2009). Interestingly, despite
having such high medicinal importance with biochemical assets, this fungus could not
be domesticated from its wild forms (Zhang et al., 2012, Zhu et al., 1998, Baral and
Perlin, 2017).
Figure 1 Yarsagumba in the ground of Pupal pasture © Kiran Pun, Maikot
4
Figure 2 Yarsagumba sprouting above the ground in the Pupal pasture © Kiran Pun
Natural driver such as climate change have an impact on interactions and distribution
of Yarsagumba across the Himalayan region (Shrestha and Bawa, 2014a). A study by
Yan et al. (2017) on the distribution of fungi in the Tibetan Plateau predicts the shift of
fungus towards higher elevations and a concentration towards the central part of the
Tibetan Plateau. They have used representative concentration pathway (RCP)
methods to predict the distribution for the years from the 2050s through until the 2070s
(Yan et al., 2017). A similar study by Shrestha and Bawa (2014a) on Nepal’s fungus
available range has suggested that certain mountain districts will experience a sharp
decline, whereas other districts will not because they have a more suitable fungus
habitat. The study used a bioclimatic model trajectory for the years 2030 and 2070
(Shrestha and Bawa, 2014).
Yarsagumba has become a highly valued and prized medicinal herb in the world
(Cannon et al., 2009, Devkota, 2010, Hvistendahl, 2007, Shrestha, 2012, Shrestha,
2014, Yeh and Lama, 2013). In mid-2008 there was an observed price of $13,200 per
5 gram for top quality fungus in China (Winkler, 2009). It takes from 3,600 to 4,200
specimens of the fungus to be weighed as one kilogram (Negi et al., 2014). China has
declared Yarsagumba as its national flagship species (Zhang et al., 2012). Globally,
85 to 185 tonnes of Yarsagumba is being traded annually worth $5 to $11 billion
(Shrestha, 2012). In 2009, high-quality Yarsagumba would cost USD 12,500 per
kilogram in Bhutan (Cannon et al., 2009) and USD 20,000 per kilogram in India (Negi
et al., 2016).
5
1.3. Setting the context
The Government of Nepal (GoN), adhering to the Forest Act 1993 (GoN, 1993),
decided to impose a collection ban on Yarsagumba (Thapa et al., 2014). The ban was
on harvesting, processing, marketing & export (Devkota, 2010, Shrestha et al., 2010,
Thapa et al., 2014). In relation to the ban, the government cited increased collectors
in the pasture leading to anthropogenic pressure in the pastures (Devkota, 2010).
However, the provision of ban and restriction was lifted with a provisional change of
royalty rates. The Nepal Gazette 2006 slashed the royalty rates to Nepalese rupees
(NRs) 10,000 per kg from NRs 20,000 to harvest the Yarsagumba. Scholars argued
that the ban on the collection of the Yarsagumba had to be lifted soon as the
Yarsagumba had a direct livelihood relationship with the fungus harvesters dependent
on it (Thapa et al., 2014). The rationale of the above-mentioned conservation decision
on common-pool resources (CPR) revolves around the notions of governing the
commons and its associated tragedy (Hardin, 1968, Ostrom, 1990).
Yarsagumba has been categorized as a species having medium priority and high
potential impacts on the socio-economic status of the people (Government of Nepal,
2016, ITC, 2007).The Government of Nepal endorsed Herbs and Non-Timber Forest
Products (NTFPs) Development Policy in 2004 a guiding policy to promote the NTFP
sector (Heinen Joel T, 2011). Even though Yarsagumba is classified as NTFPs, it is
found above the tree line. Nepal Trade Integration Strategy (NTIS) 2010 and its latest
revision in 2016 has identified 19 products (goods and services) having export
potential. Among Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (MAPs) identified, the Yarsagumba is
prioritized (ITC, 2007). Although Yarsagumba has a high value and is declared as a
national fungus of China (Zhang et al., 2012), the ability to derive benefits in a
sustainable way to support the resource-dependent mountain communities livelihoods
is at stake given the natural and anthropogenic pressure in its habitat. The
communities living in the Himalayan region are classified as highly vulnerable from the
perspective of climate change as listed in the National Adaptation Program of Actions
(GoN, 2010). The livelihoods of the Himalayan population in Nepal having a share of
6.7% (CBS, 2016) is heavily dependent on environment products such as medicinal
plants and income derived from it (Olsen and Larsen, 2003).
6
The seasonal harvesting of Yarsagumba starts from May to June each year. To pick
the fungus a seasonal migration of highlanders occurs from a lower elevation to higher
elevations (Baral et al., 2015, Weckerle et al., 2010, Yeh and Lama, 2013, Winkler,
2010a, Zhang et al., 2012). Except for elders, all children and livestock accompany
the families during the seasonal migration. Children join the harvesting families given
the benefit of their sharp vision to locate and pick the caterpillar fungus. The local
schools are shut down during the collection season (Baral et al., 2015, Winkler, 2008b,
Wang and Yao, 2011).
The four major drivers contributing to unsustainable harvesting of caterpillar fungus
can be listed as
a) increased demand and market price of alpine medicinal plants (Olsen, 2005,
Subedi, 1997, Winkler, 2009, Negi et al., 2014, Thapa et al., 2014, Bhandari et al.,
2012, Weckerle et al., 2010); b) contribution of the Yarsagumba accounting for the
highest direct cash income of the household providing space to harvest additional
pieces (Shrestha and Bawa, 2013, Winkler, 2008b); c) remoteness of the Yarsagumba
collection sites (pastures) creating difficulties in regulating the harvesting practice
(Shrestha and Bawa, 2014b); and d) impacts of climate change in the Yarsagumba
distribution areas having effects on availability in the Himalayan region (Shrestha et
al., 2012, Yan et al., 2017).
1.4. Economics: Yarsagumba as an environmental income
In rural context especially in the least developed countries and developing economies
communities still rely on forestry as a part of their environmental income. They
received 3 to 11.3% of their total household income as echoed in their study (Meilby
et al., 2014). A report by Vedeld et al. (2007) to the World Bank agreed on the definition
of environmental income as follows:
“Environmental income is rent (or value-added) captured through
consumption, barter, or sale of natural capital within the first link in a market
chain, starting from the point at which the natural capital is extracted or
appropriated” (Sjaastad et al., 2005).
7
The natural capital extraction specified in the definition is the Yarsagumba collection
in this study. Globally, the Yarsagumba is ranked as one of the expensive alpine
medicinal fungal species. The sale of Yarsagumba provides an average of 70% of
cash income for the households considered as environmental income (Shrestha and
Bawa, 2013, Shrestha and Bawa, 2014b, Winkler, 2005, Negi et al., 2006, Wangchuk
et al., 2012, Woodhouse et al., 2014). These types of wild resources extracted for
commercial purposes are overexploited leading to population declines (Peters, 1996).
Household-level studies in developing economies show forest income ranging from
15% to 39% (Babulo et al., 2009, McElwee, 2008). Studies show that poorer
households of community forest in Nepal and Uganda are restricted from accessing
the forest products compared to less poor or better off households (Adhikari et al.,
2004, Jagger et al., 2012). The effective management of the forest or pasture-
common pool resources is important to poorer households as the environmental
income acts as a safety net to them (Jagger et al., 2012). The contribution of the
environmental income in 2007 was the second largest in northern Ethiopia (Babulo et
al., 2009), rural Uganda in 2012 was 26% (Jagger, 2012).
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) report specifies about 1.1 billion
people living under $1 per day of income are highly dependent on subsistence
agriculture and extraction of wild products. Those ecosystem services if degraded will
threaten the existence of these communities (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment,
2005). Intriguingly, the assessment indicated the need to record and reflects rural
incomes in national statistics especially from the non-timber forest products (NTFPs)
such as medicinal plants and food. Furthermore, the assessment forecasted the
alarming rate of ecosystem change through unsustainable use of natural resources,
which hindered the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs 2015),
and could affect targets set by Sustainable Development Goals 2030 (UN Economic
and Social Council, 2017).
The natural resources and property rights scholars define access as ‘right to benefit
from things’ using the theory of access. Previously ‘access’ was defined as having
rights to a certain resources, but now it has been broadly defined as ‘ability to derive
benefits from the resources available in the community (Ribot and Peluso, 2003). This
theory is adapted to explain the determining factors such as age, household size,
8
years of experience in collection, gender amongst other variables concerning the
amount of Yarsagumba collected in the pasture by harvesters during 2018.
Woodhouse et al. (2014) has done similar access studies in the Tibetan context using
variables such as herding, age, education, land, alternative work, dependency ratio,
and household size.
This study examines environmental income received from the common property
resource such as Yarsagumba collection and the determinants of quantity of
Yarsagumba quantity collected from the Pupal pasture in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve,
Nepal. One study has been conducted on the determinants of caterpillar fungus
collection on Tibet (Woodhouse et al., 2014). This study is conducted in the remote
Pupal pasture of Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, eastern Rukum, Nepal to understand
the determinants and management practices. Nepal, among the countries where
Yarsagumba is collected in the higher altitude pasture, is a good location for a case
study as it is the second largest supplier of this resource (Shrestha and Bawa, 2014b).
The management of Yarsagumba provides an option to these resource-dependent
communities in terms of economic development and environmental income to sustain
their lives (Adhikari et al., 2004). Even though forestry provides environmental income,
the factors that affect the access to the resource varies as per the household
characteristics (Ribot and Peluso, 2003).
Even though Shrestha (2012) claims that Nepal’s Yarsagumba has 2% share in the
international market; the question remains is what are the determining factors for the
households which are benefiting from the Yarsagumba income. Although ranked as
the world’s most expensive fungal species, the local collectors are not able to reap the
benefits of it due to the lesser availability of the resource in the pastures (Shrestha
and Bawa, 2013). Shrestha and Bawa (2013) study has shown a declining rate of the
Yarsagumba availability up to 20% in consecutive years (2006-2011) with an increase
in the average time spent in the pastures by the collectors. In this context, examining
the household determinants that explain the amount of Yarsagumba collected and its
economic contribution fulfils the gap of accounting environmental income from this wild
resource in the national economy and benefit the communities those dependent on it.
9
1.5. Governance mechanism: management of the caterpillar fungus
Common pool resources especially non-timber forest products (NTFPs) that include
fisheries, medicinal plants, and other products fulfil many of the basic income needs
of millions of people globally (Shackleton, 2011). Ostrom (1990) defined common pool
resources as a resource system that can provide a continuous flow of resources under
a favourable condition, for example, grazing pasture provides abundant grass to
livestock (Ostrom, 2007, Ostrom, 2009, Ostrom and Cox, 2010). With regards to
common-pool resource management, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment report
indicated that global commons such as forestry will require a global environmental
governance approach to solve local problems. This paper aims to assess
management practices of such common pool resources using Yarsagumba from Pupal
pasture of Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve in Nepal as a case study.
The Yarsagumba is found in alpine and subalpine grasslands across the Tibetan
plateau (Negi et al., 2014, Zhang et al., 2012). Studies by Yan et al. (2017) has shown
that impacts of climate change on the availability of individual species is visible across
the Himalayan region; especially in the Tibetan Plateau where caterpillar fungus is
naturally found. It means such a climatic impact in one region is not limited to one’s
boundary, rather it has become a transboundary issue. As Yarsagumba is available in
most remote and uninhabited landscapes, its effective governance as a common pool
resource is an important management issue. From the social-ecological system point
of view, the capacity of the institutions to manage the resource in changing
environment and context is important.
Communities living in the Himalayan region in Nepal are highly vulnerable to climate
change impacts (GoN, 2010). The livelihoods of the indigenous people in the
Himalayan region are heavily dependent on environmental products and income such
as collecting medicinal species (Olsen and Larsen, 2003). Although Yarsagumba has
a high economic value, the ability of mountain communities in the region to derive
benefits sustainably is at stake given the natural and anthropogenic pressure on its
habitat. An earlier study of Yarsagumba in the pastures of the Dolpa district reveals a
decline in per capita harvest associated with unsustainable harvesting practices
(Shrestha and Bawa, 2013). The collectors attribute overharvesting as a reason for
the reduced availability of the Yarsagumba. Scholars have raised the issue of
10
overharvesting in various pastures of Nepal, India, Tibet, and Bhutan (Baral et al.,
2015, Shrestha and Bawa, 2014b, Negi et al., 2015, Negi et al., 2016, Negi et al.,
2006, Yadav et al., 2019, Shrestha et al., 2010, Winkler, 2010b, Cannon et al., 2009).
These case studies have reported the issue of Yarsagumba overharvesting, however
not much is known about how local communities devise strategies to address the
overharvesting issue. Given the direct (human and climate) and indirect (institutional
arrangement) drivers that influence Yarsagumba harvesting in the Himalayan region,
it is imperative to examine the effectiveness of resource governance mechanisms for
its sustainability (Shrestha and Bawa, 2013).
This study contributes to filling this research gap by examining the governance
mechanism of Yarsagumba adopted by local collectors (i.e. Maikoti) following ‘one
home one security’ management strategy in the Pupal pasture of Dhorpatan Hunting
Reserve (DHR). The findings of this study would have policy implications, in particular
to the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation and the local
management committee to develop better ways to manage Yarsagumba and to
address the challenges associated with its harvesting and trade. This study will provide
an insight into how these indigenous communities are managing the Yarsagumba
collection sites and its harvesting for sustainable management of the resource base.
1.6. Significance of the study
In 2020, IUCN listed caterpillar fungus as 'vulnerable' citing reduced population by
30% as a result of overharvesting (IUCN, 2020). Concerning my research question, I
would like to emphasise a question posed to Stewart and panel during a workshop at
Yale University (Stewart, 2014), ‘Why Yarsagumba matters now?’ Stewart’s research
focused on Yarsagumba in Yunnan province of Tibet, whereas this study focuses on
remote Pupal pasture of Nepal’s Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve. However, the question
is equally applicable. At this moment, Yarsagumba matters for Nepal in two ways: a)
overharvesting of Yarsagumba (resource unit) affecting the ability of households to
benefit from the resource system and b) challenge to local actors and institutions to
govern the Yarsagumba collection sites in the context of transboundary landscape
governance and implementation of national directives.
11
Nepal has signed an agreement on China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2017. The
initiative is a trans-Himalaya trade focussed on infrastructural connectivity such as
roads (Murton and Lord, 2019). While infrastructural connectivity can be a sign of
prosperity, the negative impacts it may have on pristine flora and fauna such as
Yarsagumba could be fatal. In future, the governance of Yarsagumba will not be limited
in Nepal’s territory but will depend on the mutually agreed projects between Nepal and
China. Hence, a new development of the initiative also calls for an effective
management (governance system) of the Yarsagumba at the local level.
1.7. Analytical framework
This study has adopted the Social-Ecological system (SES) as an organizing
framework for the analysis developed by Ostrom (Ostrom, 2009, Ostrom, 2007). The
SES framework has been adopted from McGinnis and Ostrom (2014) (Figure 3) which
has not been applied to examine the sustainable management of the caterpillar fungus
in the past. The framework is used in the context of Pupal pasture in the remote areas
of East Rukum within Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve. This framework has been chosen
as caterpillar fungus trade provides livelihood options to Himalayan harvesting
communities. So, it has both social and ecological component to it, along with another
core component of SES such as governance system.
12
Figure 3 SES Framework Sourced from McGinnis and Ostrom (2014)
This framework compromises of core system variables that are the resource system
(Pupal pasture), resource unit (caterpillar fungus), governance system (local season
management committee that has the responsibility of managing caterpillar fungus
collection and the pasture management), and users (harvesters or collectors from
Maikot- eastern Rukum). This study will only discuss the management practices and
perspectives of people of Maikot- as collectors from outside Maikot were not
interviewed). The interactions among the resource system, resource unit and
governance system produce an outcome that affects the related ecosystem and
broader social, environment and political set up. The above mentioned first level of
variables is further classified in the second-tier which has been used in the analysis
(Table 1). Out of 56 second tier variables, 36 variables are examined in the study
whereas the remaining variables do not apply to this study. The explanation of the
variables is embedded in the discussion of the chapters.
13
Table 1 Explanation of the SES variables used in the study
Category and Variable code Adopted in
study
Reason for inclusion/exclusion
Social, Economic, and Political Settings (S)
S1 Economic development Yes Contribution of caterpillar fungus to livelihood
S2 Demographic trends Yes Helps explain the determinants of collection
S3 Political stability No Not applicable for the study due to stability after local election in 2017
S4 Other governance systems Yes Layers of the governance system. The governance system of Reserve
office, Community based and District Forest Office
S5 Markets Yes Local traders perspective on the quantity of caterpillar fungus bought
and sold
S6 Media organizations No Not applicable for the study
S7 Technology No Not applicable for the study
Related Ecosystems (ECO)
ECO1 Climate patterns Yes Collected perception of collectors on last 3 years changes in the
availability of the caterpillar fungus
ECO2 Pollution patterns Yes Solid waste issues in the pastures related to harvesting directives 2017.
ECO3 Flows into and out of focal SES No Not applicable for the study
14
Resource Systems (RS)
RS1 Sector (e.g., water, forests, pasture,
fish)
Yes Pupal pasture as a case study
RS2 Clarity of system boundaries Yes Government agencies and community-based groups clash in
demarcation of boundaries.
RS3 Size of the resource system No Not applicable for the study
RS4 Human-constructed facilities Yes Use of camps/tents in the pasture
RS5 Productivity of the system Yes Collectors were asked about the pasture productivity in the last three
years.
RS6 Equilibrium property No Not applicable for the study
RS7Predictability of system dynamics No Not applicable for the study
RS8 Storage characteristics No Not applicable for the study
RS9 Location Yes Remote Pupal pasture of Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve
Resource Units (RU)
RU1 Resource unit mobility Yes Caterpillar fungus as a case study
RU2 Growth or replacement rate Yes Year wise production of the caterpillar fungus
RU3 Interaction among resource units No Not applicable for the study
15
RU4 Economic value Yes Traders and Collectors were interviewed in terms of contribution to their
households and selling price.
RU5 Size -Number of units Yes Number of pieces collected in the pasture in a given year
RU6 Distinctive characteristics No Not applicable for the study
RU7 Spatial or temporal distribution Yes Discussion with the local season management committee on
Yarsagumba availability and management
Users (U)
U1 Number of users Yes 223 collectors were interviewed
U2 Socioeconomic attributes Yes Collectors demography collected to examine determinants of
Yarsagumba collection
U3 History or past experiences Yes Past collection experiences of the collectors is recorded.
U4 Location Yes Pupal Pasture as a study site.
U5 Leadership/ entrepreneurship Yes The leadership of local management committee in adopting "one home
one security" strategy to curb overharvesting and increase the income
of Maikoti.
U6 Norms (trust reciprocity)/ social capital Yes Management practices by the community- decision making
U7 Knowledge of SES/ mental models No Not applicable for the study
U8 Importance of resource (dependence) Yes High livelihood (direct cash) dependency on caterpillar fungus
16
U9 Technologies available No Not applicable for the study
Governance Systems (GS)
GS1 Government organizations Yes Discussion with Dhorpatan Hunting reserve, and Department of
National Parks and Wildlife conservation.
GS2 Nongovernmental organizations Yes The local season management committee responsible for managing
collection and pasture.
GS3 Network structure No Not applicable for the study
GS4 Property-rights systems Yes Discussion on this with the local leaders on resource ownership.
GS5 Operational-choice rules Yes Community or Government
GS6 Collective-choice rules Yes Community-based management
GS7 Constitutional choice rules No Not applicable for the study
GS8* Monitoring and sanctioning rules Yes Season management committee devising the rules e.g. 'one home one
security'
Interactions (I)
I1 Harvesting Yes Harvesting of Caterpillar fungus
I2 Information sharing No Not applicable for the study
I3 Deliberation processes No Not applicable for the study
17
I4 Conflicts Yes Conflict on whether to hand over the management rights to local
government or the hunting reserve. There is a conflict on border
demarcation and customary rights to govern the pasture by people of
Maikot.
I5 Investment activities No Not applicable for the study
I6 Lobbying activities No Not applicable for the study
I7 Self-organizing activities Yes Local community organizing themselves to manage the caterpillar
fungus collection and self-organized to introduce a new strategy of 'one
home one security'.
I8 Networking activities Yes (third-tier
variable)
No Not applicable for the study
I9 Monitoring activities Yes Monitoring by the local management committee
I10 Evaluative activities Yes Evaluation is done by the management committee
Outcome criteria (O)
O1 Social performance measures (e.g.,
efficiency, equity, accountability,
sustainability)
Yes Local management community accountable with the community
18
O2 Ecological performance measures (e.g.,
overharvested, resilience, biodiversity,
sustainability)
Yes Tackling of overharvesting issues, and biodiversity sustainability at the
pasture
O3 Externalities to other SESs Yes Pollution due to plastic wastes in the pasture
18
1.8. Aim and Scope of the study
This thesis deals with economics and governance mechanism of the Yarsagumba in
Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve with a focus on Pupal pasture and Maikoti collectors in
the context of the ‘one home one security’ management strategy. The research
objective and research question are highlighted below.
Objective
The thesis is categorised in two themes, a) economics (determinants of the
Yarsagumba collection); and b) governance mechanism (management practice of
local season committee) of the Yarsagumba. Altogether there are four objectives of
this study.
Economics of Yarsagumba
(a) To determine the socio-economic and environmental variables that explain the
amount of Yarsagumba collected by the collectors in the Jangla and Pupal pastures
of the Dhorpatan Hunting reserve in 2018; and
(b) To assess Yarsagumba’s economic contribution to the households in terms of
income and expenses;
Governance mechanism of Yarsagumba
c) To examine the community-based natural resource management practices of the
Yarsagumba by the indigenous communities of Maikot village and;
d) To assess national management and harvesting directives implementation
challenges in remotely located Pupal pasture of Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve in Nepal.
Research Questions
Economics
i. What are the social, economic and environmental variables that explain the
amount of Yarsagumba collected?
19
ii. What is the quantified contribution of Yarsagumba in terms of income and
expenses to the collectors?
Governance
iii. How do local communities govern the Yarsagumba collection sites in the Pupal
pasture at Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve?
iv. How do these groups implement national management directives 2017 to
manage Yarsagumba at the pasture level?
1.9. Study site, survey methods and data analysis
1.9.1. Study site
The study is undertaken in the remote Pupal pastures of the Dhorpatan hunting
reserve, eastern Rukum. The area of the reserve is 1325 sq. km where 50% of the
land is pastureland suitable for grazing. It is situated in high mountain region having
the alpine, sub-alpine and high temperate type of vegetation (Kandel, 2000). As
categorised by the reserve office, Pupal pasture falls in the Seng block (145 sq. km)
where mostly mules, horses, sheep and goats are left to graze from March until
October (Kandel, 2000). Earlier in 2010 people from only Myagdi and Rukum districts
were allowed to collect Yarsagumba in the remote Pupal pasture (Thapa et al., 2014).
The study area map (Figures 4 to 7) shows the district where people of Maikot collect
Yarsagumba within Dhorpatan hunting reserve.
Eastern Rukum is one of the newest districts after federal restructuring in Nepal which
lies in Province 5 (Figure 4). People of Maikot also known as Maikoti collect
Yarsagumba from Seng block -Pupal and Jangla pastures that lie within the reserve.
Maikot is chosen as a study area for four reasons; a) almost 99% of the households
are dependent on the environmental income from the Yarsagumba in Maikot, which is
similar to the case in upper Gorkha where all households derive cash income (Childs
and Choedup, 2014); b) high-quality Yarsagumba (as claimed by community leaders)
found in Maikot, that increases the anthropogenic pressure in the habitat (Thapa et
al., 2014); c) Yarsa festival (2016) that was held in the high mountains that attracted
the attendance of high-level political representatives, media and leaders
(Onlinekhabar, 2016) which resulted in adopting a new management practice; and d)
20
there is a lack of studies following the introduction of new governance strategy adopted
in 2016 i.e. 'one home one security'. The high dependency of local people on the
environmental income from Yarsagumba, and changed governance mechanism
provides a suitable context to consider Maikot (and Pupal pasture) as a potential
research site to assess economic contribution and management practice of
Yarsagumba in the Pupal pasture.
Thapa et al. (2014) has assessed the management regime of the Yarsagumba in the
Dhorpatan hunting reserve in 2012. At this time, the 'one home one security' strategy
was not adopted by the season management committee. This study will assess the
management practice of Yarsagumba after the strategy was introduced. The impact of
the new strategy on the Yarsagumba collection and management has not been studied
previously. Collection of Yarsagumba in Pupal pasture is done by two indigenous
ethnic communities namely Magar (7.1 % of the total Nepal's population) and Kami,
lower caste (4.8%) (Kandel, 2000, CBS, 2016) (also from field observation). The local
ethnic communities (Magar and Kami) have been using pastures as their traditionally
owned land. They claim to have their customary rights in Pupal and Jangla pastures.
The community management of the Yarsagumba among indigenous groups is mostly
done by Tibetan ethnic groups (Childs and Choedup, 2014); but in Maikot, it is done
by Magar and Kami. The management of Yarsagumba by these ethnic communities is
not recorded in detail after local level elections conducted in 2017.
21
Figure 4 Map showing Rukum (East) district (Map by Ram Pandit)
Figure 5 Map showing study village, pasture and Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve (Map by
Uttam Babu Shrestha)
22
Figure 6 Map showing Maikot and Pupal pasture (Map by Uttam Babu Shrestha)
Figure 7 Putha Uttarganga Rural Municipality (Source: Department of Survey, Nepal)
23
1.9.2. Survey methods
The study is mainly based on primary data collection through a questionnaire survey
that was carried out in Pupal pasture among 223 collectors during May-June 2019
(Table 2). These collectors only represent people from Maikot ward 1 and 2, collectors
outside Maikot were not part of the sample. The researcher reached the pasture while
the new strategy 'one home one security' was in place, which means only people from
Maikot could harvest before allowing outsiders (distant collectors) in the pasture. The
total number of collectors from ward 1 and ward 2 is taken as the universe population
of the collectors. The total collectors (n=698) those who participated in the collection
in 2019 were from Maikot Ward 1 and 2. A total of 698 collectors (Maikot Village Ward
1, n=431; Ward 2, n=267) had the permit to collect Yarsagumba which was the
sampling population for the survey. Out of total 698 collectors, collectors from Maikot
Ward 1 (n=110, 26%) and Maikot Ward 2 (n=113, 42%) were randomly selected
alternatively for the face-to-face interviews.
Table 2 Interview and focus group discussion conducted in 2019
Location Governmental
actors
Community members
(collectors/collectors,
buyer)
Participants
of focus
group
discussion
(committee)
Male Female Male Female Male Female
Pupal pasture, 0 0 Collectors
: 223
122 85 3 0
Dhorpatan
Hunting Reserve,
(eastern Rukum
Maikot) and
Department of
National Parks
and Wildlife
Conservation
2 1 Maikoti
local
Village
traders
2 0 0 0
24
Firstly, a semi-structured interview with senior government officials representing the
Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation was conducted (refer Annex
C). Data or information on sustainable management aspects of the Yarsagumba could
not be gathered during the interview with the department and officials of the reserve
as the management of the Yarsagumba is solely community-based.
Secondly, a range of data was collected from collectors during the interview. Data on
demographic information, year-wise Yarsagumba availability, the unit price at
pastures, credits taken by collectors for the journey, and perception of collectors on
sustainable management of Yarsagumba were collected. The research design
adopted in this study employs both qualitative and quantitative methods. Different
qualitative and quantitative types of data were collected from four different groups of
stakeholders involved in harvesting, trade, and management of Yarsagumba.
Purposive sampling was used to gather information from other stakeholders such as
a local season Pupal management committee, local Yarsagumba traders and
Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation including reserve
representatives.
The local management committee checked the collectors permit before allowing them
to head towards Yarsagumba collection sites. The collectors representing Maikot 1
and 2 were standing in the queue in Pupal pasture. The committee checked collector’s
entry permit and then sent them to a different location to wait before getting a go ahead
signal to collect Yarsagumba. The researcher and enumerators were located in a place
where the collectors were awaiting permission. Taking this opportunity, the survey
team interviewed every second collector sent towards the waiting area.
Thirdly, focus group discussion with the committee President, Vice-President and
Secretary was conducted. Implementation issues and challenges of the management
directives 2017 were discussed and documented during the focus group discussion.
Finally, in consultation with the local enumerators, two Yarsagumba village traders
involved in the Yarsagumba trade were purposively selected based on who was
available in the pasture. Data and information on trade volume and prices of
Yarsagumba were collected from these buyers/traders through a semi-structured
interview. All values are at 15 May 2019 (112.40/USD) buying rate taken reference
25
from Nepal Rastra Bank exchange rates archive. For calculating exchange rate of
previous years for instance in 2018, same date 15 May foreign exchange rate buying
value is considered. The USD values are further calculated for Purchasing Power
Parity (PPP) taking the World Bank's value of 33.98 for the years 2014- 2019 (World
Bank, 2019). The example of the Nepalese rupees (NRs) to USD PPP value
conversion is detailed in Table 2. The process of converting NRs to USD PPP is
through three standard steps (refer table 3); (i) first convert the amount from NRs to
USD, (ii) second, find the National Currency Units per US Dollar for the relevant year
(in the World Bank database), (iii) third, divide the exchange rate by this figure; and
(iv) multiply the USD amount to get the USD PPP amount.
Table 3 Conversion of NRs to USD PPP
NPR USD
Exchange
rate 15
May 2019
Conversion
NPR to
USD
National
currency
Units per
US Dollar
for 2019
Unit/Exchange
rate
USD
PPP
18000 112.4 160 33.98 3.31 530
25000 112.4 222 33.98 3.31 736
5000 112.4 44 33.98 3.31 147
105000 112.4 934 33.98 3.31 3090
2000000 112.4 17794 33.98 3.31 58858
This is a socio-economic study involving data measured in different scales: such as
Likert scale for perception-based questions, or yes/no type of answers, and
quantitative measures for some other questions, such as the amount of harvest. Some
questions, mainly in a focus group discussion and semi-structured interview, have the
open-ended type of answers and those questions have been analysed applying a
qualitative approach.
Before the data collection process, the Participant Information Form and Participant
Consent Form were explained to the survey participants/stakeholders to fully inform
them and receive their consent before administering the survey. Ethics approval
26
(reference number RA/4/20/15114) from the Human Research Ethics Committee of
the University of Western Australia was taken before the field work. Permission to
conduct the study in Dhorpatan hunting reserve from the Department of National Parks
and Wildlife Conservation was also obtained before going to the field. In addition,
written permission from the local management committee and consent from collectors
was obtained before interviewing the collectors.
1.9.3. Data analysis
The data obtained from the interview were entered in Qualtrics and analysed using R
software (V1.2.5019). To achieve the first objective a similar study on factors
determining Yarsagumba collection conducted by Woodhouse et al. (2014) in their
Tibetan based study (n=50) was examined. Woodhouse et al. (2014) considered
variables such as age, dependency ratio, education, herding, household size,
landholding, alternative work, herding household size as an explanatory variables. In
the model used in this study, the amount of Yarsagumba collected (in pieces) is taken
as the response variable (Table 4). Explanatory variables are age, ethnic group, sex,
education level, source of the pasture where Yarsagumba was harvested, number of
days collectors stayed in the pasture and proportion of the collectors from each
household (the proportion means numbers of collectors that went to pasture were
divided by the size of the households). These variables used in the model are based
on the literature (Woodhouse et al., 2014, McElwee, 2008, Adhikari et al., 2004) and
through the analysis of newspaper coverage (463 articles) of Nepalese media
portrayal on Yarsagumba (2008-2017) by the researcher. The chosen variables were
reconfirmed with the key informants to check whether they fit the context of the study.
We have used a negative binomial regression model.
1.10. Thesis layout
The thesis consists of four chapters. The first chapter introduces the context that
explains Yarsagumba dynamics, the context of environmental income and governance
mechanism, and research design. The second chapter deals with environmental
income and economics of Yarsagumba. This chapter examines the determinants of
Yarsagumba collection: the variables examined are year of collection experience,
household size, gender, ethnicity, days spent in the pasture that determines the
amount of caterpillar collected in the Pupal pasture. The third chapter deals with the
27
community-based management mechanism and national guidelines and directives of
the Yarsagumba at the Pupal pasture. Chapter four discusses policy implications and
proposes some way forward in managing Yarsagumba.
28
Chapter 2. Economics of Yarsagumba – harvesting practices
2.1. Socioeconomic and collection attributes of users (U2)
Out of the total of 223 collectors interviewed, six of them did not participate in collecting
Yarsagumba in the year 2018. These six collectors utilised their rights to sell their
Yarsagumba collection rights to Maikoti only. On an average, the collection rights were
sold at 530 USD PPP (NRs 18,000) (refer Table 4). During Yarsagumba collection
season the collectors searched on an average of 10 hours per day. The collector used
small wooden sticks to remove the soil to pick the Yarsagumba. There were about
18% more male (59%, n=223) collectors participated in collecting Yarsagumba
compared to female (41%) collectors. The average age of the collectors was 29 years
with minimum aged of 13. The collectors stayed in the pasture for 45 days on average
ranging to 90 days maximum. On average, 169 pieces were collected per collector
with a median of 150, and within a range of 3 - 700 pieces in 2018. Maikoti collectors
collected Yarsagumba from Pupal and Jangla pasture, which is in a higher slope
considered providing a high quality of Yarsagumba. Along with collecting Yarsagumba,
the collectors also collected other medicinal plants such as Kutki while they return
home. The majority of the collectors belonged to the Magar ethnic group followed by
Kami. The demographic characteristics of the collectors along with explanatory
variables used in the negative binomial model are presented in the summary statistics
(refer Table 4).
Table 4 Summary Statistics
Model variables Overall (n=223)
# of Yarsagumba collected in 2018 (in pieces)
Mean (SD) 169 (111)
Median [Min, Max] 150 [3.00, 700]
Missing 6 (2.7%)
Collectors stay in the pasture (in days)
Mean (SD) 45.1 (19.5)
29
Median [Min, Max] 45.0 [4.00, 90.0]
Missing 6 (2.7%)
Proportion of collector
Mean (SD) 0.276 (0.164)
Median [Min, Max] 0.250 [0.00, 1.00]
Age
Mean (SD) 29.8 (10.4)
Median [Min, Max] 27.0 [13.0, 59.0]
Household size
Mean (SD) 5.54 (1.94)
Median [Min, Max] 5.00 [1.00, 12.0]
Yarsagumba per piece price
Mean (SD) 632 (59.0)
Median [Min, Max] 650 [300, 1000]
Missing 6 (2.7%)
Cash income (in '000) from Yarsagumba in 2018-
converted to USD PPP
Mean (SD) 105 (73.9)
Median [Min, Max] 97.5 [0.00, 455]
Expenditure (in '000) of collectors during the
collection season in 2018
Mean (SD) 25.8 (13.9)
Median [Min, Max] 25.0 [0.00, 80.0]
Yarsagumba collected pasture source
Mean (SD) 0.382 (0.487)
Median [Min, Max] 0.00 [0.00, 1.00]
Missing 6 (2.7%)
30
Education level
Bachelor or higher degree 1 (0.4%)
Have not attended formal schooling 64 (28.7%)
Primary (1-5 years of schooling) 54 (24.2%)
Secondary (6-12 years of schooling) 104 (46.6%)
Ethnic group
Kami 52 (23.3%)
Magar 163 (73.1%)
Others 8 (3.6%)
Sex
Female 91 (40.8%)
Male 132 (59.2%)
2.2. Yarsagumba income contribution to households (Importance of resource (U8))
On average, the selling price of Yarsagumba per piece in the pasture was 19 USD
PPP. The collectors earned on an average 3090 USD PPP in cash from Yarsagumba
collection, with an average of the total expenditure of 736 USD PPP. The proportionate
income of an average 80% is contributed to the collector’s households. The expenses
pattern shows that the collectors rank paying back the loan as a first priority followed
by food and essentials purchase. They are also investing in child education, health
expenses which show a contribution of Yarsagumba in terms of social well-being (refer
Figure 8). The case study on Jumla’s collectors also shows that income from the
Yarsagumba was invested on similar aspects such as food and clothes, festival
celebration, child education and bank deposit (Shrestha et al., 2017). An average of
168 pieces were collected by males, and an average of 169 pieces were collected by
females in 2018 showing similar amount collection patterns.
In terms of the ratio of income and expenses, the results show that collectors are in
profit from the Yarsagumba collection in the year 2018. Those collectors selling their
collection rights in an average of 530 USD PPP are also benefitting from expending
an average of 736 USD PPP expenditure in the pasture had they gone for collection.
31
There is no major proportionate difference in terms of Yarsagumba income contribution
among the collectors.
Figure 8 Ranking of expenses from Yarsagumba's income
2.3. Determinants of Yarsagumba collection
The statistical analysis was carried out using R (v. 1.2.1335) software. To explore the
relationship between explanatory variables and the response variable (pieces of
Yarsagumba collected) among collectors/households, a Generalized Linear Model
(GLMs) is used. The response variable is in the count (pieces of Yarsagumba
collected) and exhibits Poisson errors. The difference of the mean (167.77) and the
variance (12438.14) for the Yarsagumba pieces collected in 2018 is high (12270.37),
limiting the use of Poisson regression model. An over dispersion test was conducted
for the response variable which confirmed the suitability of the negative binomial
regression model to correct for over dispersion. The dispersion was 65.83.
The explanatory variables included in the model for the response variable (quantity of
caterpillar fungus collected [pieces]) is elaborated in detail below (refer Table 5).
Model: Y (quantity of Yarsagumba collected in 2018) = f (age + ethnicity +sex
+education level+ Yarsagumba collected pasture + number of days stayed in pasture+
proportion of the collectors with respect to household size) + error
0 50 100 150 200
Pay Back Loan
Buy Food
Buy Clothes
Invest in child education
Health expenses
Bank deposit
Purchase JewelleryNumber of harvesters
Exp
ense
s it
ems
32
Table 5 Response and explanatory variables used in statistical analysis
Name of the variable Description Type (units) Reference
Response variable
Pieces of Yarsagumba collected
Number of Yarsagumba collected in 2018 Continuous (pieces)
Explanatory variables
Age Age of the collector (also squared to check the non-linear effect)- the year of collection experience
Continuous (years) (Timmermann and Smith-Hall, 2020, McElwee, 2008)
Ethnic group The ethnicity of the collectors Categorical (Magar, Kami and others)
(Adhikari et al., 2004)
Sex Sex of the collector Categorical (Male and Female)
Education level Education of the collectors Categorical (No formal schooling, Primary (1-5 class), Secondary (6-10), Bachelors or Higher)
(Godoy et al., 1998, Uberhuaga et al., 2012)
Yarsagumba collected pasture
Pasture in which Yarsagumba is collected Categorical (Pupal pasture and Jangla pasture)
Number of days in a stay at the pasture
Collectors stay in the pasture Continuous (days)
The proportion of collector to household size
Number of the Collectors in the pasture from same household is divided with the total household size to compute proportion of the collectors.
Continuous (2-12 persons)
(Adhikari et al., 2004, Olsen and Larsen, 2003)
33
Table 6 reports the results from the regression model. The model suggests that for
every extra day a collector spent in the pasture, the rate of Yarsagumba collection was
1.01 times (1%) greater (95% CI 1.01-1.02) in the year 2018. There is no significant
relationship on who either male or female collects the Yarsagumba or in education
level, either with an ethnic group, education level, the source of pasture, and
proportion of the collectors to household size.
In this study, the amount (number of pieces) of caterpillar fungus collected in the Pupal
pasture is influenced by the number of days collectors stayed in the pasture, none of
the other variables examined had a significant effect. These finding contrast with some
other studies of potential determinants of the amount collected. For example studies
by McSweeney (2004) and Woodhouse et al. (2014) have shown that younger
household members collect more amount of forest resource, however, such a
significant relationship with the age and number of Yarsagumba collected was not
present in the current study. Other variables such as education and household size
were used by Woodhouse et al., (2014) to examine the role in explaining the price
gained from the commodity. In this model, we used four categorical variable and
proportion of collector (collectors in pasture divided by household size) which did not
show significant relationship with quantity of fungus collection. Similarly, Adhikari et
al., (2004) study on commons and foresty explains that caste also plays a role in the
extraction of the forest products- which does not show the significant relationship in
the model either.
34
Table 6 Results from the negative binomial regression
Quantity of Yarsagumba collected in 2018 (in pieces)
Predictors Incidence Rate Ratios Std. Error CI Statistic p
Intercept 109.53 0.67 33.97 – 532.55 7.03 <0.001***
Age 1.00 0.01 0.99 – 1.01 -0.24 0.814
Ethnic group (Magar) 1.12 0.11 0.90 – 1.38 1.00 0.316
Ethnic group (Others) 0.95 0.24 0.60 – 1.57 -0.20 0.840
Sex (male) 1.03 0.09 0.85 – 1.23 0.27 0.784
Education No formal schooling 0.59 0.63 0.13 – 1.69 -0.83 0.408
Education Primary 0.83 0.63 0.18 – 2.35 -0.30 0.764
Education Secondary 0.76 0.63 0.17 – 2.15 -0.43 0.664
Yarsagumba collected pasture source
1.09 0.09 0.91 – 1.29 0.90 0.368
Days spent in pasture 1.01 0.00 1.01 – 1.02 5.45 <0.001***
Proportion of collectors to HH size 1.35 0.27 0.79 – 2.36 1.12 0.263
Observations 217
R2 Nagelkerke 0.227
35
2.4. Trends of harvest and days of spending during the harvest of Yarsagumba in 3
years (2016-2018) (History of use (U3))
The annual harvest per person ranged between 3 and 700 pieces (mean 168.67, n =
214) in 2018. In 2017 (170.70, n=218) and 2016 (213.12, n= 76) the annual collection
was more in relation to year 2018 (refer Table 7). Similarly, the average time spending
in the pasture has decreased in 2018 to 35 compared to 39 respectively. Among the
previous years, 2016 (mean 1.48 USD PPP) and, 2017 (mean 1.54 USD PPP, the
price per piece of Yarsagumba was lower than in 2018 (mean 1.69 USD PPP).
Table 7 Trends of harvest and days of spending in the pasture, and price per piece
Year Avg days of spending at
the pasture (+/- SD)
Average total number of
pieces collected that year
(+/- SD)
Average price per
piece (USD PPP,
+/- SD)
2018 35 (+/- 19.48) 168.67(+/- 111.24) 629(+/- 64.96)
2017 42.69(+/- 18.16) 170.70(+/- 190.59) 574.40(+/- 59.22)
2016 39.03(+/-16.89) 213.12(+/-166.68) 549(+/-105)
2.5. Price and quantity of Yarsagumba (Economic value of resource unit (RU4))
The eligible Yarsagumba traders are the residents of Maikot. Around 35-40 local
traders trade Yarsagumba from Maikot. The researcher interviewed a local trader
having five years of experience. The trader shared information about the quantity sold
along with prices in the last five years (Table 8). In the last five years (2014-18), the
per piece price of Yarsagumba on an average is 15 USD PPP whereas per kg sold
was on average 53648 USD PPP. In response to the demand question, the local
traders shared that buyers seek for golden colour Yarsagumba which fetches higher
prices, buyers code it as 'choice' good. Around 2100-2200 pieces of high quality
'choice' is weighed as one kg, whereas the medium level is about 2500-2600 and
those collected during the last seasonal month are around 3000-3500 per kg/pieces.
36
Table 8 Price and Quantity of Yarsagumba in Maikot
Year Quantity bought in kg
Price (Avg) per piece in
USD PPP
NPR to USD
exchange rate in May 15
each year
Traded price in million USD PPP
(112.4/NPR)
2018 2 18 107.720 63458
2017 1.5 16 102.580 53716
2016 2 13 106.530 50206
2015 1 15 101.840 55995
2014 1.5 13 95.200 44866
The traders were concerned about the trade permit which needs to be collected from
headquarters in Rukum. They had requested the District Forest Office to place their
post at Duley which is the station before reaching Pupal pasture. However, on this
occasion the official from forest office was absent. Hence while carrying such
perishable goods the traders were at risk of getting robbed or having the fungus
confiscated as they did not have a trade permit issued before it reaches the buyers in
urban areas and wholesalers.
2.6. Summary on the economics of Yarsagumba
In this study year 2018 is taken for the analysis. This study on the economics of
Yarsagumba provides three insights: a) the economic contribution of Yarsagumba to
the collectors is more than what they expend during the collection season, b) as the
collectors stay more in the pasture they tend to collect more of caterpillar fungus. There
is no difference in household-level proportionate income contribution of Yarsagumba
to Magar and Kami (80% of the income) even to other ethnic groups (70% income).
Even though the average price per piece for Yarsagumba has increased from 2016 to
2018, the average days of spending in the pasture has decreased along with the
number of pieces collected year wise. The overstay in the pasture by the collectors as
stated by the national directives restriction on 30 days needs a review by the local
communities for resource sustainability.
37
Chapter 3. Community based management practices of Yarsagumba in Pupal
pasture
3.1. Collection practice in Pupal pasture: ‘one home one security’ (Governance
system- Collective choice rules (GS6))
In May 2016, coinciding with the International Day for Biological Diversity, the Pupal
Yarsa festival was hosted by the local season management committee and youth club
of Maikot village (Onlinekhabar, 2016, CNC, 2016). The festival had two motives: a)
to advertise the quality of Pupal’s Yarsagumba; and b) to promote tourism for a
sustained revenue flow in the region. The festival was held at 4500 metres above sea
level in the base of Putha Uttarganga Himalaya. High profile political representatives
including the then speaker of the parliament, forest minister and other related
stakeholders including media personnel attended the event. This Yarsa festival
became a turning point for the local management committee in adopting a new
governance mechanism to generate employment opportunities targeted to Maikot
villagers. As a part of this new strategy, Maikoti have a provision of selling their security
rights to local collectors only. The local committee incurred losses from this event, with
the income generated from the festival being outweighed by the expenses. For
instance, one of the major costs was the chartering of a helicopter chartered to bring
high profile political representatives to the program.
“The Yarsagumba collection system has changed since the Pupal Yarsha
festival in 2016. There was no system of ‘one home, one security’ earlier.
All collectors used to go at once in the pasture. But it’s different now. Before
all other distant collectors head towards the pasture, collectors from Maikot
have a special privilege to reach the pasture to start collecting
Yarsagumba”. (Former chair of Pupal Yarsa festival and president of the
season management committee, Maikot, May/June 2019- English
translation, original language Nepali).
Usually, the local management committee decides the pre-departure date during
May, normally a week or fortnight before opening the pasture to the public. The
rationale of the strategy is to stop illegal pickings of Yarsagumba, to check the
status and level of Yarsagumba in the pasture before collection.
38
After the recent elections in 2017, the local government requested the committee
to hand over the rights to govern the Yarsagumba collection. However, the
committee asked if the local government would pay their debt that had arisen
from the Pupal Yarsa festival. The rural municipality refused to take responsibility
and the, ‘one home one security’ strategy was adopted by the committee of
Maikot to repay the loan.
The local committee had since then launched a management strategy for Yarsagumba
collection dubbed as ‘one home, one security’ (Ek Ghar Ek Surakshya). The need for
an alternative strategy came after the 2016 Pupal Yarsa festival (Onlinekhabar, 2016,
CNC, 2016) that left the local committee in debt in millions. The new alternative entails
that each member from the respective household of Maikot can participate in the
Yarsagumba harvest before allowing access to general public i.e. collectors from
outside Maikot (distant collector). The entry fees for Maikoti (people representing
Maikot) is 147 USD PPP per household. In addition, the Yarsagumba village traders
must be a Maikoti, which could minimise the chances of illegal trade. Also, as a part
of the strategy – Maikoti’s are allowed to go to pasture a month earlier to monitor any
illegal pickings in the pasture
The committee has a history of assigning different pastures to people belonging to
Maikot ward 1 and ward 2 in the alternate years. Pupal pasture is situated at an altitude
of 3900 masl. and b) Jangla, altitude 4500 masl. This year (2019) collectors from
Maikot 1 were assigned to collect Yarsagumba from Jangla pasture, whereas
harvester from Maikot ward 2 were assigned to collect from the Pupal pasture. The
following year the allocation would switch amongst the pasture. However, there are no
restrictions on switching the pastures for collectors; as these collectors are relatives
hence would want to search together due to inter and/or intra village marriage system.
The researcher discussed with the former president of the resource management
committee also an influencer leader of Maikot before starting the survey. He shared
concerns regarding the jurisdiction and access rights of Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve
and District Forest Office, Rukum on revenue sharing from Yarsagumba collection.
The jurisdiction of Pupal pasture lies within the hunting reserve. But the rural
municipalities (gaun palikas) have an interest in revenue sharing originated from
39
Yarsagumba collection. The gaun palikas are (newly formed lower administrative
divisions in Nepal) are empowered by the constitution to govern the natural resource
management within their jurisdiction. Also, locals do not agree to share the revenue
as they have traditional rights on the pasture and have been conducting grazing over
past generations in the pasture. These ownership and rights to revenue collection
conflict can be another aspect of study. It is after these new rural village municipalities
(gaun palikas) were provided rights by the newly promulgated constitution in 2018 that
they have demanded their rights to manage Yarsagumba collection. At the moment,
the gaun palikas have started a dialogue with the committee about this issue.
However, due to jurisdiction confusion and loan that Maikoti has, gaun palikas are not
able to fully take control over the collection sites.
“Maikot remains outside of the jurisdiction of the hunting reserve however
the pasture lies on the border of the hunting reserve. The reserve official
does not have an idea about their borderline. Similarly, the District Forest
Office wants to govern the area. After the local elections of 2017, the rural
municipality has started to discuss revenue sharing with them. The
governing rights of the pasture lie with the reserve officials, not with the rural
municipality hence they cannot claim revenue sharing. Nepal has signed
the C169 Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 1989 (No.169) of
International Labour Organization that states the traditional occupiers living
there for ages should consume three ‘JA’ Jungle (forest), Jamin (land) and
Jal (water). Hence, neither the hunting reserve nor District Forest Office
should claim Pupal pastures under their jurisdictional rights as we have
been traditionally using the land for grazing and picking Yarsagumba. The
local committee do not agree to share the revenue from Yarsagumba as
they have incurred losses from Pupal Yarsa festival. Nevertheless, we are
ready to move ahead with an agreement with concerned stakeholders”
(Former president of the season management committee and local
influencer leader, Maikot, May/June 2019- English translation, original
language Nepali).
40
3.2. Impact of the new strategy (Social capital (U6) and Leadership (U5)
The committee and collectors (n=111) reported during the interview that due to the
adoption of the ‘one home one security’ strategy, the distant collectors have reduced
by half compared to the previous three years. The perception of distant collectors is
that the new strategy has helped collectors of Maikot to pick high-quality Yarsagumba
even before others are allowed to reach the pasture. Hence, instead of coming to
Pupal pasture, the distant collectors head to other pastures in neighbouring Dolpa
district. The strategy adopted by Maikoti local committee has helped to reduce the
distant collectors, however this is not a win-win situation for the outside collectors as
in the case of Shauka and non-Shauka community in Darchula (Pant et al., 2017).
“Before the adoption of the strategy in the Pupal pasture
40-50 thousand collectors would reach from neighbouring
districts such as Rolpa, Myagdi amongst others. Now we
feel the distant collectors have gone down by half” (One
of the respondent collectors from Maikot, May/June 2019-
English translation, original language Nepali).
3.3. Art of being ungoverned by reserve authority (Monitoring and sanctioning
processes (GS8))
The management and governance of the Yarsagumba collection in the pasture is
solely led by a local management committee even though the pasture falls within the
jurisdiction of the reserve. The deputy warden of the reserve requested their staff to
accompany the researcher so that they could devise a plan to initiate dialogue with the
local community to manage the Yarsagumba. The formal committee with the
participation of people belonging to Maikot ward 1 and 2 is formed before the start of
collection season to govern the collection site. This local community are supported by
permanent institutions such as the Pupal Youth Club. The tenure of the committee
members is terminated or gets renewed after Yarsagumba collection season is
finished each year. The previous management committee that had managed the
Yarsagumba collection sites in 2018 were given the authority to govern the
Yarsagumba collection sites in the year 2019.
41
The Yarsagumba management directives (MoFSC, 2017) states that as per the
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 2029 Bikram Sambat (the English year
1972 A.D), Article 3 and 3a that applies to national parks, reserves, conservation area
and buffer zone. The Yarsagumba national directive authorized the government
authority to collect entrance fees and manage the collection sites however in the study
area, collection sites were solely managed and governed by the community-led
organization the season management committee. The Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve
Office is not governing the Yarsagumba collection site unlike in Api Nampa
Conservation Area (ANCA) (Wallrapp et al., 2019). That is, the reserve office was not
managing collection activities in Pupal pasture to implement the national directive even
though the pasture lies within its jurisdiction. The rural municipality recently has started
the discussion with local management committee on revenue sharing scheme from
the entry fees.
The reserve office is hardly able to intervene in the collection activities, and the
physical presence of reserve representatives in the pasture has been non-existent
over time. The reserve office has been looking at ways to govern the collection site;
however, the dialogues have not taken concrete shape with the community-led
organization i.e. local management committee and the DHR. A case study by Wallrapp
et al. (2019) on the ANCA shows that formal community led organization leads to more
regulated collection, rather on informal settings which is the case in the Pupal pasture.
The reserve official said the following indicating their lack of ability to be involved in
governing the collection sites.
"We were not able to govern the Yarsagumba collection sites within the
reserve. Although the law provided us with the right to govern, our officials
were not able to head towards collection sites during the season. It was
unsafe for us during the collection season. We do not know their Kham
language, instead, we seek those officials who know the Magar community
and would be able to deal with them. Still, community-based management
of Yarsagumba prevails in the Pupal pasture. We are in constant
conversation with local leaders. Now there is a local government, we are
positive that we will soon be able to govern the collection site in cooperation
with the local committee in the future". (Official representative of Dhorpatan
42
Hunting Reserve May/June 2019- English translation- original language
Nepali).
After local elections in 2017 that happened after a long stalemate, it is time for the
committee to cooperate with the local government agencies to manage the pasture
during collection season. Although it is community-led management at the moment,
the governance structure will need to be adapted in the future. The arrangement for
collecting data on the amount of Yarsagumba collected in the pasture is missing, which
is of concern. The collection of data by the committee in the pastures would allow for
better management of the resource in terms of declaring grazing area, camp
management, and waste management. This could be an area of immediate
cooperation and work between local committee and the reserve. Even though the
reserve office is contemplating the governing of the Pupal pasture, without a win-win
situation on revenue and power-sharing with the local committee, they would not be
able to govern the collection sites. Recently (2017) a local government election was
held and local government representatives were available to respond to the
management aspects of Yarsagumba.
“Even if the local government takes control of the collection site, it would
not be effective as we are. Chances of unauthorised illegal pickings and
trade would flourish. They will have to take us on board” (President of the
local season management committee 2019 – English translation, original
language Nepali).
3.4. Rhetoric and reality of the Yarsa directives (Operational rules (GS5)
The researcher interviewed the current local committee, youth club’s representative,
and former chairperson of the committee to examine the implementation challenges
of the national directive at the pasture level. The directive has listed restriction on
randomly setting up the camps during the collection, haphazard disposal of solid waste
management, conflict management and better management of livestock amongst
others. Ranges of challenges were identified and observed by the collectors and the
committee (refer table 9).
43
The entire sample of Yarsagumba collectors (n=223) interviewed and the local
management committee officials, were not aware of the national directives. They were
only aware of their locally devised rules such as restrictions on alcohol consumption
and gambling in the pasture. Interestingly, in the 2016 Pupal Yarsa festival there was
participation by the speaker of the parliament, and forest ministers. Nonetheless the
directives have not reach to Maikot local government agencies those responsible for
Yarsagumba collection site management and monitoring.
“Although we invited high-level political figures to promote Yarsagumba and
tourism in Maikot, the directive has not reached the village as yet”. Teacher
and collectors at Maikot primary school, May/June 2019- English translation,
originally Nepali).
The directive issued to govern the million-dollar industry has not been communicated
well with the local committee and also in the collection sites - areas where collectors
head towards pastures for collection. For example, the directive states that camps can
be managed in the pasture. However, it doesn’t state about the location to set up camp;
it neither talks about how far or close the camps should be set up from the pasture.
The collectors are staying more than stipulated time stated in the national directives
(MoFSC, 2017), i.e., 30 days, which can be a significant reason for less availability of
the resource as reported by the collectors. The collectors did not return to their village
until they encountered rainfall or when they no longer find the Yarsagumba on the
ground. The national directives on management of Yarsagumba restrict collectors to
stay in the pasture for more than 30 days. However, these collectors stayed for a
maximum of 90 days with an average of 45 days in the pasture. This case implies that
days spent by the collectors cross the limits of the directives which provides space for
the governmental actors to have a dialogue with the local committee on the ways to
implement the directives.
44
Table 9 National management directives implementation challenges
National
management
directives
Restrictions Implementation practice Quotation
Management
of camps in
the pasture
Camp must be
installed as
instructed by the
local management
committee. Mules in
the pastures needs
to be taken through
the route as
prescribed.
In the pasture, there is constant monitoring of the
camps by the management committee to ensure
the camps are set up in the allocated areas.
"The collectors follow the rules to
install their camp/tents in the
prescribed place" (President of the
Yarsa management committee, 2019-
English translation, original language
Nepali).
Solid waste
management
No littering Temporary toilet arrangement could be seen in the
banks of the river.
"Maikoti's still practiced open
defecation in their respective homes,
hence it is a behaviour issue,"
(President of the committee, 2019-
English translation, original language
Nepali).
45
Less impact
on ecology
e.g. Forest
fires, digging
No Plastics
allowed. Do not
harm to forest and
wildlife. No forest
fires and digging in
the pasture.
The major challenge in regulating the Yarsagumba
collection is of free-grazing of livestock and
managing waste at the pasture level. As Maikoti
they freely leave the livestock to graze in the
pasture this has reduced the availability of the
Yarsagumba claims (President of the Yarsa
management committee 2019). In terms of waste
management, non-environment friendly practices
such as burning and plastic dumping in the pit were
also observed. The committee has allocated certain
areas where the collectors can unload their good
from horses and mules. There is a restriction to
take horses and mules beyond those specified
areas. The restriction rationale is based on
increased availability of Yarsagumba in the Pupal
pasture.
“There is no provision of recycling.
Nobody brings the waste back for
reuse or recycling purpose. We dig
and drop inside the ground. Next
year we will ensure that horses and
mules are grazing in the different
pasture where Yarsagumba is not
found" (President of the Yarsa
management committee, 2019-
English translation, original language
Nepali).
Social
security and
safety
Restriction on
affecting social
security in the
pasture
In terms of managing conflict in the pasture, it is
first dealt on consensus. If the issue is unresolved,
it is then taken to the local police. The collectors
are allowed to take thick small sticks and garden
“For safety purpose, we do not allow
weapons like khukuri and other
household weapons in the pasture”.
(Secretary of the Yarsa Management
46
spades as approved tools to harvest Yarsagumba.
However, they cannot take khukuri (sharp edge
traditional knife mostly used by Gurkha's) with them
during the collection. The local committee restricts
the use of alcohol and gamble in the pasture.
Committee 2019 English translation,
original language Nepali).
Length of
stay in the
pasture
Limits of 30 days in
the pasture
The collectors are staying on an average 45 days in
the pasture beyond the stipulated time of 30 days
by the management directive
“People return their home after they
don’t find Yarsagumba anymore and
also when the rainy season starts.
The days do not matter”. (President
of Yarsa Management Committee-
2019 English translation, original
language Nepali).
Regulation of
entry permits
Not applicable The entry permits are checked every week without
setting any stipulated time but usually during early
mornings.
'We conduct surprise checks of entry
permit on weekly basis in the pasture
(Secretary of the Yarsa Management
Committee, 2019). Committee's
Secretary 2019- English translation,
original language Nepali).
47
3.5. Local management committee’s future Yarsagumba sustainable management
plan (Non-government organization (GS2)
Even though the community do not have a written plan, the committee is planning to
make some changes for sustainable management of the Yarsagumba, which is in line
with the national directives. The committee has decided to continue the ‘one home one
security’ strategy in the Pupal pasture during the collection season. They will allocate
and declare different pasture for grazing purpose where Yarsagumba is not available.
Proper monitoring of the livestock to increase the revenue is another thought worthy
option. The installation of temporary plastic toilets to reduce the ecological footprints
is another option under consideration. They will cooperate with the local government
in managing the Yarsagumba. This means inviting the government forest officers in
Duley camp to issue trade permits to village traders to sell the Yarsagumba without
any fear of illegal trade charges.
3.6. Collectors next year improvement aspiration (Sector- Pasture (RS1) and Users)
The collectors when asked about the improvement that they would like to see next
year responded with for rotational harvesting (n=11) for at least a year, solid waste
management and toilet management in the pasture (n= 141), and camp management
(n= 15). The collectors perceive that current harvesting practice is unsustainable due
to random grazing of livestock in the areas where Yarsagumba is available.
3.7. Summary of governance mechanism
The new strategy adopted by the committee after 2016 is perceived as beneficial to
collectors of Maikot. The regulation as authorised by the national directive is still to be
communicated and materialised in the Pupal pasture. With the introduction of new
local government election, there will be inevitable cooperation with rural municipality
and DHR (reserve office) officials to manage, conserve and utilize the Yarsagumba for
better regulation of the collection site, and continued income for the collectors. As the
pastures are located in the remote landscape, the implementation challenges of the
national directives shall remain until state non-state actors are also involved in
managing the Yarsagumba.
From this case study, I argue that given the new strategy adopted by the Maikoti to
repay their loan has indirectly arrested the issue of overharvesting; by reducing distant
48
collectors in the pasture. The step of reallocating the grazing areas in the pasture by
the committee (and rotational harvesting along with the collaboration of community-
led organization and government actors will provide space to regulate the collection in
a transformative manner, for instance, regulating collectors length of stay time in the
pasture. This will enhance the resource sustainability and socio-economic status of
the Maikoti.
Almost the entire Maikoti community are dependent on the Yarsagumba harvesting. A
rotational harvesting practice (at least a year) and an alternative employment choice
could provide Maikoti with the option to become less dependent on Yarsagumba. In
an unprecedented scenario like COVID-19, a restriction on Yarsagumba collection
having such a high dependency on the Yarsagumba income (>75% direct cash
income) might put their livelihoods at stake. As argued, with natural (e.g.. global
warming) (Hopping and Lambin, 2018) and anthropogenic drivers (e.g.. overcrowded
pastures) (Negi et al., 2015) increasingly affecting the production and harvesting of
Yarsagumba, such a scenario is possible.
The limited availability of Yarsagumba is dealt with a scientific dilemma, it requires an
interdisciplinary approach to integrate biophysical and socio-economic factors aided
with traditional knowledge for sustainable management of the resource as in the case
of wild mushroom of China (He et al., 2011).
49
Chapter 4. Concluding remarks and policy implications
It is evident from the case study that environmental income (80% cash income) from
the caterpillar fungus is an important and substantial part of the mountain livelihood
that requires effective governance of rural remote pastures. The household cash
contribution of Yarsagumba is significant as shown in other studies, hence ensuring
resource sustainability by the local season management committee acts as an income
safety net to the collectors. This type of field-based case study provides insights and
a basis on which to quantify Yarsagumba’s economic importance at local and even at
national level. The communal management strategies adopted by indigenous
communities is highlighted in this study.
The new strategy, 'one home one security' adopted by local season management
committee has helped in reducing distant collectors. The implementation challenges
of the national directives can be reduced by increased collaboration with non-state
actors such as committee and other concerned stakeholders at the community level.
Without coordination of community-led organization and governmental actors,
regulation of Yarsagumba collection sites will remain weak to realise the goal of
resource sustainability.
The Government of Nepal has devised Yarsagumba management and transportation
guidelines which are inadequate and targeted at less important issues for resource
sustainability of the Yarsagumba dynamic ecosystem services. The environmental
income from Yarsagumba has contributed to household income that ranges from
education, health and food. Hence, the income and consumption of the Yarsagumba
income inside the household can inform policy about the willingness to invest in
development activities at the local level.
This research will help in providing feedback to the Department of National Park and
Wildlife Conservation to improve Yarsagumba management guidelines. More
importantly, the study reveals the household dynamics of environmental income-
earning and spending patterns which in turn will help in devising poverty reduction
strategies in the case study area,
50
References
ADHIKARI, B., DI FALCO, S. & LOVETT, J. C. 2004. Household characteristics and forest dependency: Evidence from common property forest management in Nepal. Ecological Economics, 48, 245-257.
ANGELSEN, A., JAGGER, P., BABIGUMIRA, R., BELCHER, B., HOGARTH, N. J., BAUCH, S., BÖRNER, J., SMITH-HALL, C. & WUNDER, S. 2014. Environmental Income and Rural Livelihoods: A Global-Comparative Analysis. World Development, 64, S12-S28.
BABULO, B., MUYS, B., NEGA, F., TOLLENS, E., NYSSEN, J., DECKERS, J. & MATHIJS, E. 2009. The economic contribution of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics, 11, 109-117.
BARAL, B. & PERLIN, D. S. 2017. Entomopathogenicity and Biological Attributes of Himalayan Treasured Fungus Ophiocordyceps sinensis (Yarsagumba). Journal of Fungi, 3.
BARAL, B., SHRESTHA, B. & TEIXEIRA DA SILVA, J. A. 2015. A review of Chinese Cordyceps with special reference to Nepal, focusing on conservation. Environmental and Experimental Biology, 13, 61-73.
BHANDARI, A. K., NEGI, J. S., BISHT, V. K., SINGH, N. & SUNDRIYAL, R. C. 2012. Cordyceps sinensis: fungus inhabiting the Himalayas and a source of income. Current Science (00113891), 103, 876-876.
CANNON, P. F., HYWEL-JONES, N. L., MACZEY, N., NORBU, L., TSHITILA, SAMDUP, T. & LHENDUP, P. 2009. Steps towards sustainable harvest of Ophiocordyceps sinensis in Bhutan. Biodiversity and Conservation, 18, 2263-2281.
CBS 2016. Nepal in Figures 2016. In: CENTRAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS, N. P. C. S., GOVERNMENT OF NEPAL (ed.). Kathmandu: CBS.
CHILDS, G. & CHOEDUP, N. 2014. Indigenous management strategies and socioeconomic impacts of Yartsa gunbu (Ophiocordyceps sinensis) harvesting in Nubri and Tsum, Nepal. Himalaya, 34, 8-22.
CNC. 2016. Harvesting season of Yarsagumba in Nepal. CNC International. DEVKOTA, S. 2010. Ophiocordyceps sinensis (Yarshagumba) from Nepal Himalaya:
status, threats and management strategies. In: ZHANG, P. H.-W. (ed.) Cordyceps resources and Environment. People's Republic of China: Grassland Supervision Center by the Ministry of Agriculture.
DÍAZ, S., DEMISSEW, S., CARABIAS, J., JOLY, C., LONSDALE, M., ASH, N., LARIGAUDERIE, A., ADHIKARI, J. R., ARICO, S., BÁLDI, A., BARTUSKA, A., BASTE, I. A., BILGIN, A., BRONDIZIO, E., CHAN, K. M. A., FIGUEROA, V. E., DURAIAPPAH, A., FISCHER, M., HILL, R., KOETZ, T., LEADLEY, P., LYVER, P., MACE, G. M., MARTIN-LOPEZ, B., OKUMURA, M., PACHECO, D., PASCUAL, U., PÉREZ, E. S., REYERS, B., ROTH, E., SAITO, O., SCHOLES, R. J., SHARMA, N., TALLIS, H., THAMAN, R., WATSON, R., YAHARA, T., HAMID, Z. A., AKOSIM, C., AL-HAFEDH, Y., ALLAHVERDIYEV, R., AMANKWAH, E., ASAH, S. T., ASFAW, Z., BARTUS, G., BROOKS, L. A., CAILLAUX, J., DALLE, G., DARNAEDI, D., DRIVER, A., ERPUL, G., ESCOBAR-EYZAGUIRRE, P., FAILLER, P., FOUDA, A. M. M., FU, B., GUNDIMEDA, H., HASHIMOTO, S., HOMER, F., LAVOREL, S., LICHTENSTEIN, G., MALA, W. A., MANDIVENYI, W., MATCZAK, P., MBIZVO,
51
C., MEHRDADI, M., METZGER, J. P., MIKISSA, J. B., MOLLER, H., MOONEY, H. A., MUMBY, P., NAGENDRA, H., NESSHOVER, C., OTENG-YEBOAH, A. A., PATAKI, G., ROUÉ, M., RUBIS, J., SCHULTZ, M., SMITH, P., SUMAILA, R., TAKEUCHI, K., THOMAS, S., VERMA, M., YEO-CHANG, Y. & ZLATANOVA, D. 2015. The IPBES Conceptual Framework — connecting nature and people. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 1-16.
GODOY, R., GROFF, S. & O'NEILL, K. 1998. The role of education in neotropical deforestation: Household evidence from Amerindians in Honduras. Human Ecology, 26, 649-675.
GON 1993. Nepal Forest Act. In: MINSTRY OF FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT (ed.). Kathmandu.
GON 2010. National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) to Climate Change. In: MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT (ed.). Kathmandu: GoN.
GOVERNMENT OF NEPAL 2016. Nepal Trade Integration Strategy (NTIS) 2016. In: MINISTRY OF COMMERCE (ed.). Kathmandu.
HARDIN 1968. The Tragedy of Commons. Science, 162, 1243-1248. HE, J., ZHOU, Z., YANG, H. & XU, J. 2011. Integrative Management of
Commercialized Wild Mushroom: A Case Study of Thelephora ganbajun in Yunnan, Southwest China. Environmental Management, 48, 98-108.
HEINEN JOEL T, R. S.-A. 2011. The Non-Timber Forest Products Sector in Nepal: Emerging Policy Issues in Plant Conservation and Utilization for Sustainable Development. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 543-563.
HOPPING, K. A., CHIGNELL, STEPHEN M, & LAMBIN, E. F. 2018. The demise of caterpillar fungus in the Himalayan region due to climate change and overharvesting. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 11489-11494.
HVISTENDAHL, M. 2007. Rich pickings. Trade Journal. 2007 ed. London: The Financial Times Limited.
ITC 2007. Export Potential Assessment in Nepal. Geneva: International Trade Centre in collaboration with Trade and Export Promotion Centre.
IUCN. 2020. World’s most expensive fungus threatened [Online]. Available: https://www.iucn.org/news/species/202007/almost-a-third-lemurs-and-north-atlantic-right-whale-now-critically-endangered-iucn-red-list [Accessed].
IUCN NEPAL 2000. National Register of Medicinal Plants, Kathmandu, IUCN Nepal. JAGGER, P. 2012. Environmental income, rural livelihoods, and income inequality in
western Uganda. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 21, 70-84. JAGGER, P., LUCKERT, M. K., BANANA, A. & BAHATI, J. 2012. Asking Questions to
Understand Rural Livelihoods: Comparing Disaggregated vs. Aggregated Approaches to Household Livelihood Questionnaires. World Development, 40, 1810-1823.
KANDEL, R. 2000. Status Paper of Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve. Grassland Ecology and Management in Protected Areas of Nepal, 3, 137-145.
LANGE, D. 2006. International Trade in Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Actors, volumes and commodities. In: R.J. BOGERS, L. E. C. A. D. L. (ed.) Medicinal and Aromatic Plants. The Nederlands: Springer.
MCELWEE, P. D. 2008. Forest environmental income in Vietnam: Household socioeconomic factors influencing forest use. Environmental Conservation, 35, 147-159.
52
MCGINNIS, M. D. & OSTROM, E. 2014. Social-ecological system framework: initial changes and continuing challenges. Ecology and Society, 19.
MCSWEENEY, K. 2004. Forest product sale as natural insurance: The effects of household characteristics and the nature of shock in eastern honduras. Society and Natural Resources, 17, 39-56.
MEILBY, H., SMITH-HALL, C., BYG, A., LARSEN, H. O., NIELSEN, T. J., PURI, L. & RAYAMAJHI, S. 2014. Are Forest Incomes Sustainable? Firewood and Timber Extraction and Productivity in Community Managed Forests in Nepal. World Development, 64, S113-S124.
MILLENNIUM ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington DC.
MOFSC 2017. Yartsagumba management: Collection and transportation directive. In: CONSERVATION, M. O. F. A. S. (ed.). Kathmandu: Government of Nepal.
MURTON, G. & LORD, A. 2019. Trans-Himalayan power corridors: Infrastructural politics and China's Belt and Road Initiative in Nepal. Political Geography, 77, 102100.
NEGI, C. S., JOSHI, P. & BOHRA, S. 2015. Rapid vulnerability assessment of Yartsa Gunbu (Ophiocordyceps sinensis [Berk.] G.H. Sung et al) in Pithoragarh District, Uttarakhand State, India. Mountain Research and Development, 35, 382.
NEGI, C. S., KORANGA, P. R. & GHINGA, H. S. 2006. Yar tsa Gumba (Cordyceps sinensis): A call for its sustainable exploitation. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 13, 165-172.
NEGI, C. S., PANT, M., JOSHI, P. & BOHRA, S. 2014. Yar tsa Gunbu [Ophiocordyceps sinensis (Berk.) G.H. Sung et al.]: the issue of its sustainability. Current Science (00113891), 107, 882-887.
NEGI, C. S., PANT, M., JOSHI, P. & BOHRA, S. 2016. Conserving the Caterpillar Fungus (Ophiocordycepssinensis [Berk.] G. H. Sung et al): A Case Study of Habitat Ecology and Sustainability in District Pithoragarh, Western Himalaya, India. Int. J. Biodivers. Conserv., 8, 196-205.
OLSEN, C. S. 2005. Quantification of the trade in medicinal and aromatic plants in and from Nepal. Acta Horticulturae. International Society for Horticultural Science.
OLSEN, C. S. & LARSEN, H. O. 2003. Alpine medicinal plant trade and Himalayan mountain livelihood strategies. The Geographical Journal, 169, 243-254.
ONLINEKHABAR. 2016. Yarsa festival is kicking off shortly in Rukum, at 4,500 metres ASL. How about joining in? Onlinekhabar.
OSTROM, E. 1990. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action.
OSTROM, E. 2007. A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 15181-15187.
OSTROM, E. 2009. A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science, 325, 419.
OSTROM, E. & COX, M. 2010. Moving beyond panaceas: a multi-tiered diagnostic approach for social-ecological analysis. Environmental Conservation, 37, 451-463.
PANT, B., RAJESH KUMAR, R., CORINNA, W., RUCHA, G., UTTAM BABU, S. & ASHOK, R. 2017. Horizontal integration of multiple institutions: solutions for
53
Yarshagumba related conflict in the Himalayan region of Nepal? International Journal of the Commons, 11, 464-486.
PETERS, C. M. 1996. Observations on the sustainable exploitation of non-timber tropical forest products. Current Issues in Non-timber Forest Products Research, 19-39.
POULIOT, M., PYAKUREL, D. & SMITH-HALL, C. 2018. High altitude organic gold: The production network for Ophiocordyceps sinensis from far-western Nepal. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 218, 59-68.
PYAKUREL, D., BHATTARAI SHARMA, I. & SMITH-HALL, C. 2018. Patterns of change: The dynamics of medicinal plant trade in far-western Nepal. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 224, 323-334.
RIBOT, J. C. & PELUSO, N. L. 2003. A Theory of Access. Rural Sociology, 68, 153-181.
SHACKLETON, S. 2011. Non-Timber Forest Products in the Global Context, Dordrecht, Springer.
SHARMA, E., MOLDEN, D., RAHMAN, A., KHATIWADA, Y. R., ZHANG, L., SINGH, S. P., YAO, T. & WESTER, P. 2019. Introduction to the Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment. In: WESTER, P., MISHRA, A., MUKHERJI, A. & SHRESTHA, A. B. (eds.) The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment: Mountains, Climate Change, Sustainability and People. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
SHRESTHA, B., ZHANG, W., ZHANG, Y. & LIU, X. 2010. What is the Chinese caterpillar fungus Ophiocordyceps sinensis (Ophiocordycipitaceae)? Mycology, 1, 228-236.
SHRESTHA, U. 2014. Chasing interconnections: Mountains, mushrooms and people. In: BAWA, K. S., IVANOVA, M., KESSELI, R. & STEVENSON, R. (eds.). ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
SHRESTHA, U. B. 2012. Asian medicine: A fungus in decline. Nature, 482, 35. SHRESTHA, U. B. & BAWA, K. 2014a. Impact of Climate Change on Potential
Distribution of Chinese Caterpillar Fungus (Ophiocordyceps sinensis) in Nepal Himalaya. PLoS One, 9, e106405.
SHRESTHA, U. B. & BAWA, K. S. 2013. Trade, harvest, and conservation of caterpillar fungus (Ophiocordyceps sinensis) in the Himalayas. Biological Conservation, 159, 514-520.
SHRESTHA, U. B. & BAWA, K. S. 2014b. Economic contribution of Chinese caterpillar fungus to the livelihoods of mountain communities in Nepal. Biological Conservation, 177, 194.
SHRESTHA, U. B., DHITAL, K. R. & GAUTAM, A. P. 2017. Economic dependence of mountain communities on Chinese caterpillar fungus Ophiocordyceps sinensis (yarsagumba): a case from western Nepal. ORYX, 1-9.
SHRESTHA, U. B., DHITAL, K. R. & GAUTAM, A. P. 2019. Economic dependence of mountain communities on Chinese caterpillar fungus Ophiocordyceps sinensis (yarsagumba): a case from western Nepal. 53, 256-264.
SHRESTHA, U. B., GAUTAM, S. & BAWA, K. S. 2012. Widespread Climate Change in the Himalayas and Associated Changes in Local Ecosystems. PLoS ONE, 7, e36741.
SIGDEL, S. R., ROKAYA, M. B., MUNZBERGOVA, Z. & LIANG, E. 2017. Habitat Ecology of Ophiocordyceps sinensis in Western Nepal.(Report). Mountain Research and Development, 37, 216.
54
SJAASTAD, E., ANGELSEN, A., VEDELD, P. & BOJÖ, J. 2005. What is environmental income? Ecological Economics, 55, 37-46.
SMITH OLSEN, C. & OVERGAARD LARSEN, H. 2003. Alpine medicinal plant trade and Himalayan mountain livelihood strategies. Geographical Journal, 169, 243-254.
STEWART, M. O. 2014. The rise and governance of 'Himalayan Gold': Transformations in the caterpillar fungus commons in Tibetan Yunnan, China. 3635929, University of Colorado at Boulder.
STONE, R. 2008. Last stand for the body snatcher of the Himalayas? Science, 322, 1182.
SUBEDI, B. P. 1997. Utilization of non-timber forest products: Issues and strategies for environmental conservation and economic development. Kathmandu: Asia Network for Small-scale Agricultural Bioresources.
THAPA, B., PANTHI, S., RAI, R., SHRESTHA, U., ARYAL, A., SHRESTHA, S. & SHRESTHA, B. 2014. An assessment of Yarsagumba ( Ophiocordyceps sinensis ) collection in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Nepal. Journal of Mountain Science, 11, 555-562.
TIMMERMANN, L. & SMITH-HALL, C. 2020. Commercial Medicinal Plant Collection Is Transforming High-altitude Livelihoods in the Himalayas. Mountain Research and Development, 39, -, 8.
UBERHUAGA, P., SMITH-HALL, C. & HELLES, F. 2012. Forest income and dependency in lowland Bolivia. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 14, 3-23.
UN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL. 2017. Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals, Report of the Secretary-General [Online]. UN. Available: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=E/2017/66&Lang=E [Accessed].
VEDELD, P., ANGELSEN, A., BOJÖ, J., SJAASTAD, E. & KOBUGABE BERG, G. 2007. Forest environmental incomes and the rural poor. Forest Policy and Economics, 9, 869-879.
WALLRAPP, C., KECK, M. & FAUST, H. 2019. Governing the yarshagumba ‘gold rush’: A comparative study of governance systems in the Kailash Landscape in India and nepal. International Journal of the Commons, 13, 455-478.
WANG, X.-L. & YAO, Y.-J. 2011. Host insect species of Ophiocordyceps sinensis: a review. ZooKeys, 127.
WANGCHUK, S., NORBU, N. & SHERUB, S. 2012. Impacts of Cordyceps Collection on Livelihoods and Alpine Ecosystems in Bhutan as Ascertained from Questionnaire Survey of Cordyceps Collectors.
WECKERLE, C., YANG, Y., HUBER, F. & LI, Q. 2010. People, money, and protected areas: the collection of the caterpillar mushroom Ophiocordyceps sinensis in the Baima Xueshan Nature Reserve, Southwest China. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19, 2685-2698.
WINKLER, D. 2005. Yartsa Gunbu - Cordyceps sinensis. Economy, ecology and ethno-mycology of a fungus endemic to the Tibetan Plateau. Wildlife and Plants in Traditional and Modern Tibet: Conceptions, Exploitation and Conservation, 33, 69-85.
WINKLER, D. 2008a. The mushrooming fungi market in Tibet exemplified by Cordyceps sinensis and Tricholoma matsutake. Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, 4, 1-47.
55
WINKLER, D. 2008b. Yartsa Gunbu ( Cordyceps sinensis ) and the Fungal Commodification of Tibet’s Rural Economy. Economic Botany, 62, 291-305.
WINKLER, D. 2009. Caterpillar Fungus (Ophiocordyceps sinensis) Production and Sustainability on the Tibetan Plateau and in the Himalayas. 5, 291.
WINKLER, D. 2010a. Caterpillar Fungus (Ophiocordyceps sinensis) on the Tibetan Plateau. Geographische Rundschau International Edition, 6, 44-49.
WINKLER, D. 2010b. CORDYCEPS SINENSIS: A precious parasitic fungus infecting Tibet. Field Mycology, 11, 60-67.
WOODHOUSE, E., MCGOWAN, P. & MILNER-GULLAND, E. J. 2014. Fungal gold and firewood on the Tibetan plateau: Examining access to diverse ecosystem provisioning services within a rural community. ORYX, 48, 30-38.
WORLD BANK. 2019. PPP conversion factor, GDP (LCU per international $) [Online]. Available: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP [Accessed 25 November 2020 2020].
YADAV, P. K., SAHA, S., MISHRA, A. K., KAPOOR, M., KANERIA, M., KANERIA, M., DASGUPTA, S. & SHRESTHA, U. B. 2019. Yartsagunbu: Transforming people's livelihoods in the Western Himalaya. ORYX, 53, 247-255.
YAN, Y., LI, Y., WANG, W.-J., HE, J.-S., YANG, R.-H., WU, H.-J., WANG, X.-L., JIAO, L., TANG, Z. & YAO, Y.-J. 2017. Range shifts in response to climate change of Ophiocordyceps sinensis, a fungus endemic to the Tibetan Plateau. Biological Conservation, 206, 143-150.
YEH, E. T. & LAMA, K. T. 2013. Following the caterpillar fungus: nature, commodity chains, and the place of Tibet in China's uneven geographies. Social & Cultural Geography, 14, 318-340.
ZHANG, Y., LI, E., WANG, C., LI, Y. & LIU, X. 2012. Ophiocordyceps sinensis, the flagship fungus of China: terminology, life strategy and ecology. Mycology, 3, 2-10.
ZHU, J., HALPERN, G. & JONES, K. 1998. The scientific rediscovery of a precious ancient Chinese herbal regimen: Cordyceps sinensis - Part II. J. Altern. Complement Med.: MARY ANN LIEBERT INC PUBL.
56
Appendix
Annex A Survey questionnaire of Yarsagumba collectors, 2019
A. Survey questionnaire of Yarsagumba collectors, 2019
Section A Codes and Verification (CV)
Questions Option Remarks/ Hint
Q1 Questionnaire ID: OS Each enumerator needs to fill the
questionnaire number. Note OS is
used as a short form for
Ophiocordyceps Sinensis.
Q2 Interviewer ID: OS1| OS2 | OS3| OS1: Sanjeev Poudel
Q3 Date of the interview (yyyy-mm-dd)
57
Section B: Background information of Harvesters
Questions Option Remarks/ Hint
Q4 For how many years have you been
collecting caterpillar fungus?
Less than 3 years 1
More than 3 years 2
If the harvester has less
than 3 years of collection
experience, thank the
respondent and
discontinue the survey.
Q5 How old are you?
Q6 Sex of the respondent 1 Male 2 Female
Q7 Respondent's village name
Q8 What is the size of your household?
Q9 What is your education level?
Have not attended formal schooling (1)
Primary (1-5 years of schooling) (2)
Secondary (6-12 years of schooling) (3)
Bachelor or higher degree (4)
58
Section C Data on Caterpillar fungus harvests
Q10 Select a year in which you have harvested caterpillar fungus? Insert the pasture name. This covers the last 3 years 2075,
2074, 2073. Start from the present year and then go backwards. Note for the year 2076 it is data of a few days only.
Year Pasture
1 Pupal
Days spent while collecting
OS (excluding transport
days to and from
harvesting sites) (1-90
days)
Pieces
collected
average per
day in that
year (0-100)
Average
price
obtained per
piece in that
year (1-600)
Advance
payment
received that
year (0-
100000 Nr)
Whom did
you sell the
OS?
1 Local
traders
2 Traders
from Outside
2076
(2019)
2075
(2018)
59
2074
(2017)
2073
(2016)
Q11 How do you spent the money you earn form the caterpillar fungus trade? (proportionate spending) [Note to enumerator-
ask the respondent until the total becomes 100%]
% spending
Pay loan and interest
Buy food
Buy clothes
Children education
Health related expenses
60
Bank deposit/savings
Purchase jewellery
Purchase Land
Purchase Livestock
Celebrate festivals
Other (specify)
Q12 What are your majority of income sourced from?
Items Proportionate (%)
Farming and Livestock (1)
Medicinal plants e.g. OS collection and trade (3)
Service (e.g. teaching) (4)
Pension (5)
61
Seasonal labour (6)
Remittance (7)
Other (specify) (8)
Q13 How many types of livestock do you posses? What is the market rate for the adult and baby?
Adult Unit price market
rate for adult
Child Unit price market
rate for child
Yak
Cow
Horse
Mule
Poultry
Others (specify)
62
Section D Cost associated with caterpillar fungus harvest and sale
Questions Option Remarks/ Hint
Q14 How much time did it take you
to reach the pasture?
Days can be in
fraction for e.g..
3.5 days
Q15 What is the cost that you have
incurred in the following heading to
reach pasture for this year's
collection?
Food to family members in the pasture : _______
Food to livestock brought in the pasture : _______
Transportation/Porter cost : _______
Warm clothes : _______
Equipment’s : _______
Loan (if applicable) : _______
Others (specify) : _______
Total : ________
63
Q16 If you have taken a loan to
cover the cost mentioned above,
from whom did you borrow?
Bank/Finance
Neighbor/ Local lenders
OS traders
Middlemen/Broker
Others
Q17 What is the prevalent interest
repayment rate for the money
borrowed as a loan for the trip?
Q18 How much do you pay as an entry fee to collect the OS and revenue to government per kg?
Amount
Entry fees
Revenue per kg
Pay nothing
Others (specify)
64
Questions Option Remarks/ Hint
Q19 If you could quantify in
monetary terms, how much
income you would have foregone
due to this trip?
Q20 What would you be doing, if
you were not in the pasture to
harvest OS to generate income?
Q21 What are the other indirect
expenses you incur while you
visit the pasture?
Agricultural land remains uncultivated
Income from wage-based work
Others (specify)
65
Q22 What is the type of land you own, and their size?
Size (in local units)
Agricultural land
Kitchen garden
Others
Q23 How much of your land is uncultivated proportionately as a result of this visit? (%)
%
Uncultivated agricultural land (%)
Uncultivated kitchen garden (%)
66
Section E Resource availability
Q24 Have you experienced any difficulties in finding OS in recent years? Yes No
Q25 If yes, whether you agree or disagree with following statements
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
The number of collectors
has increased (became
more competitive)
Searching days have
increased (> time
requires to find)
Less availability of OS
Others such as...
67
Questions Option Remarks/ Hint
Q26 Has the number of OS
collectors changed in last 3 years?
No change
Fewer
More
Don't know
Q27 Is it, this year possible for you
to collect the same number of OS
pieces per day as you did 3 years
ago?
Yes, the same number
No, I collect more
No, I collect less
Don't know
68
Section F: Governance
Questions Option Remarks/ Hint
Q28 Do you know about OS harvesting
and management guidelines?
Yes / No
Q29 If yes, please share one rule that is
easy to comply and another that is not
convenient to comply.
Section G: Qualitative - Opinion and preference-based questions to harvesters
Q30 How many people in your household participate in caterpillar fungus collection this year?
Q31 Have your children accompanied you for the collection? Yes No
Q32 If your children have accompanied you, please comment on following statement?
Strongly agree Somewhat
agree
Neither agree
nor disagree
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Children have sharp
vision to trace the OS
69
We need to collect as
much as we can- more
the merrier- utilizing
school closure time.
Others such as...
Q33 How do you know, where to find the OS?
Q34 After you find a piece, what do you do? (cleaning, drying, sorting, quality checks, other).
Q35 In your opinion, what provisions would you like to see improved during caterpillar harvesting season next year (when you
plan to come back to this pasture)?
Q36 If you want to further know about the survey please share your name and contact details.
Section H: Enumerator reflections
Q37 How reliable is the information generally provided by this respondent? Poor | Reasonably Reliable | Very reliable |
Any, comments or additional information about the interview?
70
Annex B Questions to discuss with Yarsa Management Committee
B. Questions to discuss with Yarsa Management Committee
B1 Registration: Name of the participants representing committee [Take group picture after consent]
Name Position Phone number
1
2
3
4
5
71
B2 Lets discuss the OS harvesting and management directive of DNPWC. What are the issues, concerns of implementing the
guidelines during harvesting season?
72
Items Answers
Camp management in the pasture. Do the harvesters put camps outside the allocated
place? How do you monitor?
Drinking water: Water: How is clean drinking water managed during the OS collection?
Solid waste management. Is the use of plastics allowed in the pastures? How do you
control it? Are the waste transported for recycling purpose?
Health facilities Are harvesters provided with health facilities?
Fuelwood: How is Fuelwood managed during the collection?
Less impact on ecology e.g. Forest fires, digging
Social security and safety. What are the conflict resolution strategies if there is a conflict
in the pastures? Is there any plans to ensure the safety of the harvesters? If yes. Please
explain.
Restriction on taking tools approved by officials
If the harvester does not comply with the rules, what are the steps taken by the
management committee? e.g. Harvesters without trade permits.
73
Collection of entry fees: How do you collect/regulate the entry fees?
B3 Is there a Cordyceps collection and management plan prepared at the local level? If yes, can I have permission to look into
the management plans? [Take the picture of the plans].
B4 If no, why it has not been prepared?
B5 What is the role of management committee in terms of managing the collection and trade of OS?
B6 Do you think an uncontrolled number of harvesters in the pastures during the collection season has raised an issue? Yes |
No
B7 If yes, what are the issues?
B8 How does the committee decide to allow the number of stays in the pastures?
B9 How is the access of the traders determined in the pasture?
B10 Do you have the yearly records of harvesters and quantity of OS? If yes, please provide the following
Number of
harvesters
permitted
Number of days harvesters
stayed in the pastures
Quantity of OS from
this pasture
Average price
per piece
2075 (2018)
2074 (2017)
74
2073(2016)
2072 (2015)
B11 In your opinion, what provisions would you like to see improved during caterpillar harvesting season next
year?_________________________________________________________
Annex C Questions to discuss with Department of National Park and Wildlife conservation authorities
C. Questions to discuss with Department of National Park and Wildlife conservation authorities
75
C1 Respondent details: Ask for a visiting card, if available
C2 Let’s discuss the OS harvesting and management guidelines- compliance by the harvesters during the harvesting season.
Answers
Camp management: Do harvesters stay within the geographical area
provided by the authorities?
Water: How is clean drinking water managed during the OS collection?
Solid waste: How are the solid and liquid waste managed in the pastures?
Health: Are harvesters provided with health facilities?
Social security and safety of the harvesters
Minimum ecological impacts e.g. minimizing forest fires
76
C3 Can you please share the records of the number of people’s entry to pasture (yearly- last 5 years quantity of OS, and
revenue collected by the state from Pupal pastures, RanmaMaikot village, Rukum district, Nepal. (Adapted from Annex 4 of
OS management directives
Number of harvesters in the
pasture
Vol of OS in kg Revenue generated
2075 (2018)
2074 (2017)
2073 (2016)
2072 (2015)
2071 (2014)
C4 Do you think the revenue collected from the trade of OS satisfactory? If not, why
C5 In your experience, do you see harvester staying more than a permissible time (30 days) in the pasture? If yes, what is
your opinion? Why do you think harvesters stay more than permissible time?
________________________________________________________________
77
C6 Do you think allowing an uncontrolled number of harvesters in the pasture is an issue? Yes Yes | No
C7 If yes, what are the course of action you have taken to curb the issue?
C8 Do you think illegal trade happens during the OS collection season which affects the revenue stream of the government?
Yes
No
C9 If yes, what do you think the best way to respond to this issue?
C10 Collection of any materials from inside the protected areas is not forbidden by law, why is OS harvesting allowed in these
areas?
C11 Is there any role of the state in ensuring that harvesters receive fair prices of OS per kg?
C12 Are there any plans to add value to OS for better economic value?
C13 In your opinion, what provisions would you like to see improved during caterpillar harvesting season next year?
78
Annex D Question to discuss with Yarsagumba village traders
D. Question to discuss with Ophiocordyceps Sinensis traders
Questions Option Remarks/Hint
D1 When did you start the OS trading business?
D2 What type of trader are you? 1 Local trader
2 Trader from outside
D3 Do you give advance payment to collectors?
How much?
Yes | No.
D4 How do you differentiate good quality OS and
not so good?
(Probe for colour and
size)
79
D5 As soon as you receive the OS, what do you
do? (cleaning, sorting)
D6 Are you receiving expected supply volume of
Ophiocordyceps Sinensis from the harvesters?
1 Yes
2 No
D7 What is the average quantity you have been supplied in the last 3 years?
Year Vol/Qty in kg Price per unit you paid
2074 (2018)
2073 (2017)
2072 (2016)
80
Questions Option Remarks/Hint
D8 If no, what could be the reasons for not receiving
an expected quantity of Ophiocordyceps sinensis
from this pasture?
D9 What is the estimated demand of OS volume this
season 2019?
D10 Before selling OS, what are the process that you
need to follow in order trade OS?
D11 To whom do you sale the OS after receiving from
the harvester?
1 Middle men
2Traders from Kathmandu
3Traders from Tibet
4 Others, please specify ___
D12 Where do you sale the OS? 1 Within Nepal 2 Outside Nepal 3 Both
81
D13 If within Nepal, where? and in what price per kg?
D14 If outside Nepal, where? and in what price per
kg?
D15 Who demands OS from you? What are the
incentives for your to purchase OS?
D16 There is a risk of price fluctuation of OS each
year. How do you manage the risk of price
fluctuation?
D17 In your opinion, what provisions would you like
to see improved during caterpillar harvesting season
next year (when you plan to come back to this
pasture)
81
Annex E Photos from the field
![BMC Evolutionary Biology BioMed Central · The ascomycete Ophiocordyceps sinensis (Berk.) Sung, Sung, Hywel-Jones and Spatafora (syn. Cordyceps sinensis) [1], ... The singleton sites](https://img.dokumen.tips/doc/110x75/60b6ad30fc316b4a363742fd/bmc-evolutionary-biology-biomed-central-the-ascomycete-ophiocordyceps-sinensis-berk.jpg)
