Abstract 

Conservation programs often prioritize ecological outcomes while overlooking the social inequalities that shape access to natural resources. Drawing from field experiences in Nepal’s Tarai Arc Landscape (TAL) and Sacred Himalaya Landscape (SHL), this of lesson learning reflects on efforts to mainstream Gender Equality, Disability and Social Inclusion (GEDSI) within conservation initiatives. It highlights institutional, social, and governance barriers that limit meaningful participation and equitable benefit sharing. The experience demonstrates that inclusive conservation strengthens both biodiversity outcomes and community resilience. Sustainable conservation must therefore address structural inequalities, institutionalize gender-responsive budge planning, and recognize marginalized groups as key environmental stewards. 

Key Words: Inclusive Conservation; Gender Equality; Disability Inclusion; Social Equity; Human-Wildlife Conflict; Gender-Responsive Budgeting; Nepal. 

Overview

In Nepal, conservation landscapes such as the TAL and SHL are globally recognized for biodiversity significance. However, conservation success depends not only on species protection but also on how equitably resources, risks, and benefits are distributed. Mainstreaming GEDSI into conservation planning has emerged as a strategic approach to reduce discrimination in natural resource governance and improve long-term sustainability. 

This lesson learning story synthesizes practical insights from implementing inclusive conservation strategies across community forests, buffer zones, watershed management, conservation area management. 

Challenges

Limited Institutional Ownership: GEDSI is often treated as the responsibility of a focal person rather than embedded across the conservation program cycle. Planning and budgeting processes frequently lack systematic gender and social analysis, leading to partial or symbolic inclusion. 

Dominated Governance Structures: Community-based natural resource management institutions such as buffer zone committees, watershed conservation, conservation area and forest user groups are commonly dominated by male elites. Although women may hold formal positions, they often lack influence in decision-making, budget allocation, and benefit sharing. Marginalized groups remain underrepresented in substantive leadership roles. 

Complex Policy Environment : Nepal has progressive policies on inclusion and local governance. However, guidelines related to forestry, watershed and, conservation area management and local government are technically complex and sometimes contradictory and inconsistent. Local institutions often lack the capacity to interpret and operationalize these frameworks effectively. 

Human-Wildlife Conflict and Differential Impacts: Conservation gains, particularly the recovery of tiger, rhino, snow leopard and other predators and prays populations, have increased human-wildlife encounters in some areas. Women, children, and persons with disabilities face heightened risk because daily activities collecting firewood, grazing livestock, accessing service center, schools and markets that require movement through forest corridors. Crop loss and livestock depredation undermine food security, while constant exposure to risk contributes to psychological stress. Increasing human tiger conflicts in TAL and livestock, crops depredation and fragile watershed areas at SHL are emerging challenges in both landscapes.  

Domestic Workload and Social Norms: Women’s unpaid care work and subsistence responsibilities limit their participation in leadership and public forums. Male out-migration in rural Nepal has further increased women’s workload. Deep-rooted norms that prioritize male control over income and financial decisions continue to restrict women’s engagement, even when they contribute significantly to conservation efforts. 

Lessons Learned 

Leadership Creates Transformational Space: Conservation platforms can become entry points for women and marginalized groups to shift from subsistence roles to leadership, enterprise development, budget management and conservation governance. When supported through training and mentorship, women demonstrate strong stewardship and management capacity.  

Livelihoods and Conservation Are Interconnected: Watershed management, agroforestry, and sustainable energy initiatives show that ecological restoration can enhance land productivity, diversify income sources, and improve household nutrition. Linking conservation with livelihoods strengthens community ownership. 

Policy Implementation: Nepal already has policy provisions supporting inclusion and gender-responsive budgeting. The key challenge is effective implementation, monitoring, and institutional accountability rather than creating additional complex policy frameworks. 

Equitable Benefit Sharing: Revenue generated from protected areas can reduce inequality if targeted toward households most affected by wildlife and socially excluded groups. Transparent allocation mechanisms build trust between conservation authorities and communities.

Conclusion 

• Gender and social inequality are structural determinants of conservation outcomes 

• Conservation efforts are unsustainable when women, marginalized groups, people affected by human–wildlife conflict bear disproportionate costs. 

• Conservation institutions should mainstream GEDSI principles into planning and budgeting with clear, transparent, and targeted beneficiary identification. 

• Monitoring systems must be reformed to accurately capture and verify actual beneficiaries and distributional impacts. 

• Increased investment is needed in interventions that reduce women’s time poverty and unpaid care burdens. 

• Inclusive conservation is a foundational prerequisite for ecological resilience, social justice, and sustainable development, not a supplementary component. 

[Blog preview photo credit: blog author Tara Prasad Gnyawali]