Floriculture in Nepal

The consumption of cut flowers in the world is worth US$ 13,000 million. The main importers are the USA, Germany, France, UK, Switzerland, Sweden,Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Belgium, Italy, Australia, and Japan. Germany is the largest importer, followed by the US, France and Britain. Among the exporters , the Netherlands dominates the world trade (65%), followed by Columbia (12%) and Israel (6%). Thailand holds  sixth position in export of cut flowers (Prasad and Kumar, 2005).In present context  Half of the flowers produced in the world is consumed by western Europe alone and a large expansion in flower consumption is taking place in Eastern Europe,Japan, China, South Korea, Thailand and Indonesia.

Kathmandu valley is the central of Cut flower business in Nepal . The localization is mainly due to access to consumer-orientation and favorable natural conditions. The establishment of such industries takes place wherever consumers with sufficient purchasing powers are living. The existence of most of the star  hotels, big business houses and international houses encourage the establishment of these industries in Kathmandu rather than in other places. Similarly, the topography and climatic conditions prevalent within the valley support the establishment of floricultural enterprises (Chhetri, 1999). Cut flower business has shown steady and continuous growth  in Nepal. Due to urbanization and modernization, the demand of the cut flower has increased tremendously. There is ample scope for promotion of this business within Kathmandu valley as the demand is not fulfilled .Import of cut flowers from india and other countries by Hotels and other consumers can be substituted by  Promotion of domestic production .

Mainly two seasons  production  are prevails for cut flower  in Nepal i.e., summer season and winter season. In summer season, the demand of flower has been fulfilled by the Nepalese grower whereas in winter, wholesalers/retailers import flowers from India, as demand is not achieved by the Nepalese production. During the summer, the demand of the cut flower is accomplished by the production within Kathmandu, Bhaktapur, Lalitpur and nearby area from valley.

Organic Agriculture

A.G. Howard, one of the pioneers of organic agriculture observed farming in India for many years and established  the theory of organic agriculture. The theory provokes for the sustainable farming through balancing the soil by recycling organic materials back to the soil i.e. resource-cycle farming which existed in Asia for over a thousand years. However, modern agriculture has been focusing an economic efficiency without giving much attention on environment. Without doubt; such pursuits followed side effects and the green revolution is one of the example (Murayma, 2001).

Evidences from all over the world shows that the organic farming has increased the crop yield by doubled or trippled in land where resources are poor, diverse and complex. In irrigated condition, if maintained the yield. While, in the industrialized agricultural system, transition to sustainable agriculture could decrease the production per hectare by 10-20% in short form, but provides better level of financial returns of farmers (Yadav, 2001).

Sustainable means keeping efforts/things continuously, that is development without destruction (Dhital et.al. 2005). It is to meet the needs of present without compromising the ability of future generation to meet their own needs (WCED, 1987).

Traditionally organic agriculture has always been practiced in Nepal. Hill farmers depends primary on organic manure (FYM) either as compost prepared from locally available organic materials as a FYM (Budathoki et.al. 1993 cited in Neupane, 2004).

Organic agriculture sector is developing rapidly around the world and is being practiced in approximately 110 countries. World wide land under organic agriculture is estimated to be 30.4 million ha. Nepal has 26 organic farms, but Yadav (2001) reports two certified two farms in Nepal with 125ha land. Accordingly countries with greatest organic area are Australia (12.3 million ha), China (2.3 million ha), Argentina (2.2 million ha) USA (1.6 million ha). and study by IOFAM show that, increase in 1.8 million ha area at the end of 2006.

The global market of organic products is increasing. The estimated sales expanded by 7 to 9% . The higher growths of sales were observed in Western Europe and North America. However, the home of  60% of the world population, Asia has a small market.

Organic certification or guarantee is required in Nepal. International certification is expensive. Affordable verification systems for the farmers should be developed (Bhat, 2005).

Major organic importer countries (like USA, Japan, EU) have developed extensive legislation for organic products to enter into their markets for which certification according to official standard is a precondition (Shakya, 2005).

Organic agriculture offers trade opportunities for farmers in the developing and developed counties. The market of organic product is expected to grow globally in the coming years and high growth rate (from 10-15 to 25-30%) are expected. The organic market expansion makes it possible for farmers to reap the benefits of trade with relatively high price premiums (Yussefi and Willer, 2002 )

POVERTY, INEQUALITY AND LAND REFORM IN NEPAL

The eradication of poverty is the biggest challenge faced by policy makers in Nepal. Poverty is increasingly concentrated among small farmers and agricultural labourers (WB, 2006). Present socio-economic structure of the country reveals that land is the main property and source of income for the majority of Nepalese people. Land reform is important also in the context of incipient industrial and commercial sectors which at present cannot cater for the rapidly growing population. In this respect, increase in agricultural productivity through secure access to land can potentially be one of the most effective approaches to alleviate rural poverty.

Over the last decade aggregate poverty reduced significantly from 42% to 31%. However, the decline was slow in rural areas compared to urban areas and is still high at 35% (WB, 2006). Whilst overall growth increased and overall poverty reduced, the Gini coefficient increased from 34.2 to 41.4, indicating a rise in inequality as the growth was seen most evident in the rich community. The country’s GDP may be constrained by unequal land distribution. For nearly one third of total agricultural land is occupied by 7% of upper households whereas nearly 20% lower households have to survive with less than 3% of total agricultural land (CBS, 2004a).

Land is often misallocated which then hampers agricultural development and perpetuates rural poverty. Those who have land don’t know how to use it most effectively and those who know how to use it, don’t have it. Consequently, the agricultural productivity of the country is much lower compared to other countries in the region (WB, 2006). These all suggest that there is potential for increasing farm production three to four-fold through land and agrarian reform (NPC, 1998). So, proper policy programme to transfer agricultural land from unskilled to skilled farmers through effective land reform program may be an important instrument to alleviate poverty and disparity.

In past fifty years, there have been many attempts to a redistributive land reform program to alleviate poverty and inequality, but without success. The land reform program of 1964 had heightened social and psychological consequences, but had little impact on agrarian structure. The government confiscated and redistributed only a very small fraction of land above the ceiling compared to its

expectation. In 1994 the High Level Land Reform Commission submitted the Badal Commission Report to implement land reform; however no steps were taken to do so. In 2001, another land reform program with a revolutionary tag was announced. The focus of the program was to amend the Land Act 1964 in order to reduce the legal  size of land holding per family.But Thapa (2001) points out that this was merely a political ruse as the political pronouncement was made without weighing up of socioeconomic implications, and exclusive of any schemes and information of land appropriation and redistribution. In conclusion, there has been little progress in the last fifty years in land reform.