The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is now controlling over more than 80 percent of Nepalese territory. In their control area, they apply their own policy and institutional arrangements. People residing in these areas are confronting with the new realities and challenges in access, control and use of available natural resources. The aim of this paper is to examine this dimension for better understand of sustainability aspect of the resource management in fragile states.
Findings of the study demonstrate that the dominant role of the government in control, management and utilization of the land and natural resources as state owned property has now been drastically changed because of the ?new regime?. The traditional notion of natural resources as state owned property and practice of regulating them by the state regulation through privatization or licensing or leasing has now does not existed in the ?core areas? of the insurgents. Instead, new arrangements of collective actions in resource management are expanding in the controlled areas of ?new regime?. However, the Maoist policy on NRM is also creating confusion to local people because of its contradictions with the government policy and practices. This paper concludes that confrontation between the policies and institutional arrangements of two regimes has not only posed enormous challenges, but also provided new opportunities in managing available natural resources.
One state, two regimes or ?state within the state? as an outcome of internal armed conflict is not uncommon. Lebanon (Hezbollah regime), Palestine (Hamas regime) and Nepal (Maoist ?new regime?) are three of the many examples observed in recent years of conflict history. Though, there are fundamental differences in nature and functioning of Hezbollah and Hamas than the Maoists and can not be compared, state within the state is a common characteristic of all three countries because all of three nations have parallel governments, parallel armies and parallel rules in a country.
Together with the advancement of the Maoist insurgency in Nepal, this landlocked mountainous country faced unique situation in managing natural resources. The armed rebellion started by the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (CMN-M) in February 1996 in the four western hill districts of Nepal is ever increasing and now expanded all over the country. The ongoing armed conflict between the government and the CMN-M is posing a severe threat to human security in the country. The situation of natural resource management became complicated particularly after the declaration of Janasarkars or people?s government, United Revolutionary People's Council in centre and local levels (autonomous regions , district and village level peoples? government) by the Maoists and declaration of its 75 point ?Common Minimum Policy and Programme of United People?s Council? (2002), which drastically contradicts with the policy and programmers of the government of Nepal. What Maoists say this situation is ?old regime? (state) and the ?new regime? (the Maoists). The confrontation between the ?old? and ?new? regimes resulted into shrinking of state presence in rural areas and overwhelming domination of Maoists that has direct implications in managing natural resources.
The aim of this paper is to examine the policy and institutional challenges faced in managing natural resources in Nepal after the operation of Maoists people?s government in rural remote areas of the country.
