In the heart of Nepal’s Terai Arc Landscape, a delicate dance between conservation and community is unfolding, with far-reaching implications for global biodiversity and the people who call these regions home. A recent study, led by Hari Prasad Pandey from the University of Southern Queensland and the Department of Forests and Soil Conservation in Nepal, sheds light on the often-overlooked challenges faced by communities displaced for conservation efforts. Published in Global Transitions, the research, titled “Resettlement for conservation: Assessing health and social security challenges in Nepal’s biodiverse regions,” offers a stark reminder that the path to preserving nature is not always smooth for those who must step aside.
The Terai Arc Landscape is a biodiversity hotspot, boasting six protected areas, three Ramsar sites, and two World Heritage Sites. Yet, the push for conservation has led to the displacement of communities from 11 villages, raising critical questions about the balance between protecting nature and safeguarding human well-being. Pandey’s study delves into the health and social security impacts of ecological resettlement, painting a vivid picture of the struggles faced by those uprooted from their homes.
The research, which involved 215 households, 11 focus groups, and 30 key informant interviews, reveals significant disparities in health and social security experiences. Agriculture-dependent households, the elderly, ethnic communities, and women have borne the brunt of these disruptions. “The first five years post-resettlement were particularly tough,” Pandey notes. “We saw severe disruptions in livelihoods, health, and social ties. While there were gradual improvements over time, these were often driven by broader political and economic trends rather than targeted support from resettlement agencies.”
One of the most striking findings is the persistent challenges faced by Indigenous communities. These groups have experienced a loss of food security, weakened social ties, and barriers to accessing traditional healthcare. The disruption of nature-based healing practices has hindered the intergenerational transfer of knowledge, further exacerbating these issues. “Indigenous communities rely heavily on their environment for sustenance and healing,” Pandey explains. “When they are displaced, these vital connections are severed, leading to long-term social and health issues.”
The study calls for a more holistic approach to resettlement, emphasizing the need for essential health and social security services to be established before displacement occurs. It also advocates for the integration of on-site livelihood strategies into social security frameworks, ensuring that resettlers have the tools they need to build sustainable lives. “We need to ensure that resettlers are represented in decision-making processes,” Pandey stresses. “Their voices and needs must be at the forefront of any conservation-driven resettlement effort.”
For the energy sector, the implications are clear. As the push for renewable energy sources intensifies, so too will the need for land and resources. Conservation efforts, while crucial, must be balanced with the well-being of local communities. This study serves as a reminder that sustainable development is not just about protecting the environment but also about supporting the people who depend on it.
As we look to the future, Pandey’s research offers a roadmap for more equitable and sustainable conservation practices. By prioritizing the health and social security of displaced communities, we can ensure that the path to preserving nature is one that benefits everyone. The findings published in Global Transitions, which translates to “Global Transitions” in English, underscore the need for a more inclusive approach to conservation, one that recognizes the interconnectedness of human and environmental well-being.