Nepal has long been a global leader in wildlife conservation, with nearly a quarter of its land designated as protected areas. Over the past 25 years, forest expansion has reached around 46%. Yet, the recent approval of the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Bill threatens to undo much of this progress by allowing commercial interests to encroach upon precious ecological zones.
New Bill, New Threat
In July, President Ramchandra Paudel signed a bill aimed at fostering investment, including amendments to the 1973 National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act. The bill introduces a new clause under Section 5A, allowing the government to designate areas within national parks and conservation zones as “highly sensitive” or “non-sensitive.” Critics fear this could pave the way for commercial projects such as resorts and cable cars within wildlife habitats.
The 1973 Act has been crucial in protecting Nepal’s natural heritage by strictly defining areas like national parks, reserves, and strict nature reserves. However, this new amendment opens the door for development by categorising parts of these areas as “non-sensitive,” making them eligible for private sector projects. Conservationists argue that such loopholes will erode the very purpose of these protected zones, allowing commercial interests to encroach upon vital ecosystems.
Nepal’s 1973 National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act amendment introduces “highly sensitive” and “non-sensitive” categories, allowing commercial development within protected areas.
Expert Warnings and the Risks of Commercial Projects
Rajesh Rai, a professor at the Institute of Forestry, warns that even small-scale developments in “non-sensitive” areas could disrupt natural habitats, leading to biodiversity loss and increased human wild life conflict. Furthermore, the bill allows “national priority projects,” or those approved by the Investment Board, to proceed within intermediate zones of protected areas. These provisions could trigger unchecked construction in wilderness zones, disrupting ecosystems and putting endangered species at risk.
Proposed projects like the Kori cable car in Sikles, the 80 km Pokhara Jomsom gondola, and new resorts in Rara, Chitwan, and Bardia National Parks could have irreversible consequences for areas that have taken decades to restore. The ongoing push for development inside protected areas—such as hydropower and resort projects—has been a long-standing issue, with businesses lobbying to open conservation areas for such infrastructure projects.
Fast-tracked legislation raises concerns about motives and accountability.
Expert Warnings and the Risks of Commercial Projects
The bill has raised alarm among constitutional experts, who argue that it contradicts Nepal’s Constitution and violates international treaties like the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and the World Heritage Convention. These experts contend that the amendment undermines Nepal’s legal commitments and damages its conservation reputation.
The bill was rushed through the legislature in just 26 days, raising concerns about its legitimacy. Furthermore, it was introduced by the Ministry of Industry, Commerce, and Supplies, despite conservation laws typically falling under the Ministry of Forests and Environment, sparking suspicion and undermining transparency, especially amidst recent corruption scandals.
Conservationists’ Demands and the Role of Indigenous Communities
Conservationists are calling for the immediate repeal of this amendment, which they believe prioritises commercial interests over natural heritage. They highlight the hypocrisy of punishing local villagers for activities like foraging within protected areas while permitting businesses to develop resorts and hotels in the same zones. They also stress that any commercial activities should benefit the Indigenous communities who were displaced to create these conservation zones.
International Criticism and Global Repercussions
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has strongly condemned the amendment, specifically Section 5A, and called for its withdrawal. In a statement, the IUCN warned that such changes could harm Nepal’s international conservation standing by undermining the balance between development and environmental protection, as laid out in the Nepali Constitution.
Savyata Adhikari is a junior editor with Nepal Connect
As Nepal stands at a crossroads, conservationists, Indigenous communities, and international organisations urge the government to halt the new amendment and refocus on sustainable, long-term conservation priorities.