Your search found 2 records
1 Rijal, S.; Rimal, B.; Acharya, R. P.; Stork, N. E. 2021. Land use/land cover change and ecosystem services in the Bagmati River Basin, Nepal. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(10):651. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09441-z]
Land use ; Land cover change ; Ecosystem services ; River basins ; Cultivated land ; Forest cover ; Biodiversity ; Carbon ; Sustainability ; Urbanization ; Models / Nepal / Bagmati River Basin
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050658)
(1.66 MB)
Delivery of ecosystem services is strongly affected by changes in the land use/land cover (LULC) of an area. In this study, we analyze spatiotemporal changes in LULC of the rapidly changing Bagmati River Basin (BRB) of Nepal during 1988–2018 using Landsat satellite images. We also quantify carbon storage in different physiographic regions and LULC classes using the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs (InVEST) model and assess economic valuation of carbon using the benefit transfer method. According to our analysis, there were increases in urban/built-up (247.5%), barren land (109.5%), shrub land (32.4%), and declines in forest cover (- 6.2%), cultivated land (- 4.1%), waterbodies (- 30.3%), sand (- 29.2%), and grass cover (- 10.6%) during the study period. As a result of these changes in LULC, carbon storage declined from 31.4 million tons year-1 in 1988 (worth 157.0 million USD) to 30.8 million tons year-1 (154.1 million USD) in 2018 with the total loss of 2.9 million USD. The largest decline in stored carbon was observed in Tarai and Dun valleys, from 6.8 to 6.5 million tons (- 1.4 million USD) followed by Churia, from 7.8 to 7.6 million tons (- 1.1 million USD). Increases in carbon storage were observed in urban/built-up and shrub land areas and declines in cultivated land, forest, barren land, waterbodies and grass land. The results of LULC change and estimated carbon stock in BRB provides a baseline for planners and policy makers to formulate appropriate plans to sustainably manage the region’s land cover and to mitigate carbon loss.
2 Karki, G.; Bhatta, B.; Devkota, N. R.; Acharya, R. P.; Kunwar, R. M. 2021. Climate change adaptation (CCA) interventions and indicators in Nepal: implications for sustainable adaptation. Sustainability, 13(23):13195. [doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313195]
Climate change adaptation ; Indicators ; Disaster risk reduction ; Resilience ; Vulnerability ; Climate-smart agriculture ; Communities ; Food security ; Livelihoods ; Development plans ; Institutions ; Projects / Nepal / Himalaya
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050828)
(1.41 MB) (1.41 MB)
We reviewed 76 climate change adaptation projects that were operational between 2010 and 2020. The review was followed by office and field visits for verification. The office visit helped crosscheck the findings, and the field observations carried out between December 2020 and April 2021 asked 24 key informants and collected supplementary information appraisal and indicator development. Of the CCA projects studied, the most (n = 48, 32%) were community-based initiatives, while the least (n = 12, 8%) were ecosystem-based interventions. The main environment-centered projects were Ecosystem-based Adaptations and Ecosystems Protecting Infrastructure and Communities (EPIC) while Enhanced Action of Inclusive CSOs for Participation in Climate Resilient Economic Growth (UTHAN), Initiative for CCA (ICCA), Support to Rural Livelihoods and Climate Change Adaptation in the Himalayas (HIMALICA), etc., adaptation projects were community-based. Capacity building and awareness-raising were the major thrust of the CbA projects, while the abatement of climate vulnerabilities and risks through nature-based solutions were priorities of EbA. Payment for Ecosystem services is a nature-based solution that can play a role in enhancing adaptation to climate change at a local scale by adopting community-based and culturally appropriate methods and enhancing and incentivizing adaptation measures and capacities. A set of 11 criteria and 40 indicators comprised the institutional and behavioral responses and the use of technologies, and the design of climate-resilient plans and climate-smart practices were proposed as appraisal measures to evaluate the success of CCA interventions. The importance of criteria and indicators lies in the fact that such a comprehensive assessment would lead to effective and efficient adaptation projects, which could help benefit beyond the borders. It also furthers ongoing adaptation interventions and is set to be an integral part of associated studies and monitoring and review of new adaptation interventions.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
