REPORT ON

Study on Status and Potentiality of Rubber Plantation in

Nepal

Government of Nepal
Ministry of Forests and Environment
Forest Research and Training Centre
Babarmahal, Kathmandu

1
Contributor: Independent Environment Research CentrePvt. Ltd. (IERC Pvt. Ltd.), Subidhanagar,
Kathmandu, Email: ienvironmentrc@gmail.com

Reviewer: Yam Prasad Pokharel, Dhirendra Kumar Pradhan, Bimal Kumar Acharya,
Thakur Subedi, Manju Ghimire, Bishnu Prasad Dhakal and Kiran Kumar Pokharel

Reproduction: Any reproduction of this publication in full or in part required prior

approval

Citation:
FRTC, 2021, Study on status and potentiality of rubber plantation in Nepal,
Forest Research and Training Center (FRTC), Ministry of Forests and
Environment, Babarmahal, Kathmandu Nepal.

Publisher: Forest Research and Training Center, Babarmahal, Kathmandu, Nepal, P.O. Box:
3369, Tel: +977-1-5320482
Email: info@frtc.gov.np
Web: www.frtc.gov.np

2
 Forewords

Rubber is a multipurpose product which can be extracted from both natural and synthetic/
petroleum materials.In Nepal, rubber plantation was initiated in Jhapa district after the
establishment of Gorakhkali Rubber Udhog Limited. Furthermore, Gorakhkali Rubber Udyog
Limited also supported farmers for growing rubber in Jhapa and Morang districts under the
leadership of various rubber experts. Many studies have shown that the eastern part of the
country is suitable for rubber plantations. In Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari and Illam districts,
private farmers are engaged in the rubber plantations. Some community forests are also
engaged in plantation activities. In this context, if rubber plantation can be promoted and
extended, it can create many employment and income generation activities.

There is the huge potentiality of producing rubber in eastern districts of Nepal, and new
rubber industries are under establishment. There is need for multi-sectoral cooperation and
both public and private sectors need to be engaged to promote rubber cultivation. This will
not only create job opportunity but also reduces the trade deficit in the rubber sector.
Financial subsidies, capacity building training to farmers, and policy to utilize barren and
marginalized land for rubber plantation need to be formulated. There is a need for research on
impacts on natural vegetation and financial sensitivity analysis considering various scenarios
for promoting rubber plantation So, this study will be milestone to know about rubber
plantation and guide to policy maker, forester, and related line agency for informed decision
making.

I would like to thank Independent Environment Research Center (IERC) Pvt. Ltd for
preparing this report. I appreciate Manju Ghimire for preparation of research protocol, study
methodology development and overall coordination and Bimal Kumar Acharya for the study
supervision. I would like to express the deepest appreciation to Prasant Poudel (Director
IERC, project management and data analyst), Dr. Bidur Khadka (Team leader), Mr. Tilak
Bhandari (Natural Rubber Expert/ Pioneer Rubber Scientist), Mr Ujjal Raj Acharya
(Economist),Pawan Goutam (GIS Expert) and Enumerators Mr. BikalDahal,Ms. Prapti
Sharma,Mr.Tekraj Ghimirefor their contribution and hard work.I would like to
thankDDG Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Pradhan for his support and supervision during study
period. I am further thankful to Reviewer team Mr. Yam Prasad Pokhrel (Director General)
Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Pradhan (Deputy Director General) , Mr Bimal Kumar Acharya,
Mr. Thakur Subedi, Ms Manju Ghimire, Mr Bishnu Prasad Dhakal and Mr Kiran Kumar
Pokharel for improving this document in publishable form.At last, but not least,I
acknowledge all professional and FRTC staff who directly or indirectly involved in shaping
this document.

I am very much hopeful that this document will be helpful to guide and support the policy
maker, researcher, and student for further extension and development of rubber plantation.

Yam Prasad Pokharel

Director General

3
 Forest Research and Training Centre
TABLE OF CONTENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT III
ACRONYMS VII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VIII
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 10
1.1 10
1.2 HISTORY OF RUBBER PLANTATION IN NEPAL 12
1.3 13
1.4 SCOPE OF THE WORK 13
CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY 14
2.1 14
2.2 METHODS AND ACTIVITIES 15
2.3.1 Review of Information 15
2.3.2 Consultation with FRTC 15
2.3.3 Designing and Finalization of the Survey Toolkits 15
2.3.4 Field Execution (data collection) 16
2.3 20
2.4 DATA COMPILATION AND ANALYSIS 21
CHAPTER III: RESULTS AND FINDINGS 24
3.1 PRESENT STATUS OF RUBBER PLANTATION IN NEPAL 24
3.1.1 Area under rubber plantation 24
3.1.2 Ownership of rubber plantation 25
3.1.3 Land holding size 26
3.1.4 Major types of land used for rubber plantation 26
3.1.5 Types of cropping (cropping pattern) 27
3.1.6 Soil Types (Texture class) and pH 27
3.1.7 Source of seedling and methods of plantation 28
3.1.8 Silviculture treatment for rubber cultivation 28
3.2 29
3.2.1 29
3.2.2 Annual Income from rubber plantation 30
3.2.3 Local level authority perception 31
3.2.4 Impacts on native vegetation 31
3.3 32
3.4 41
3.4.1 41
3.4.2 44
3.4.3 46
3.5 49
3.6 50
3.6.1 Initiatives from Government Sector under PMAMP 51
3.6.2 Initiatives from Private sector 52
3.6.3 53
3.7 54
CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 55
4.1 CONCLUSIONS 55
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS 55
REFERENCE 57
ANNEXES 59

4
5
 List of Tables
TABLE 1: SOURCE OF SURVEY TOOLS ADOPTED FOR COLLECTION DATA 16
TABLE 2: NAME OF COMMUNITY FOREST CONSULTED DURING FIELD 18
TABLE 3: DETAIL OF FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS 19
TABLE 4: DETAIL OF CONSULTED EXPERTS 19
TABLE 5: DETAIL COST CONSIDERED FOR CALCULATION OF OPPORTUNITY COST 20
TABLE 6: BIOCLIMATIC VARIABLES AND THEIR DESCRIPTION 23
TABLE 7: RUBBER PLANTATION DISTRICTS AND THEIR AREA. 24
TABLE 8: LAND OWNERSHIP AND AREA UNDER RUBBER PLANTATION 25
TABLE 9: TYPES OF CROPPING PATTERN FOUND IN STUDY AREA 27
TABLE 10: SUMMARY OF SILVICULTURE TREATMENT FOR RUBBER PLANTATION 29
TABLE 10: FARMERS PERCEPTION ABOUT RUBBER PLANTATION 30
TABLE 11: AREA SUITABLE FOR RUBBER PLANTATION (PARTICIPATORY MAPPING) 32
TABLE 14: ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES AND THEIR PERCENTAGE CONTRIBUTION IN MAXENT MODEL FOR RUBBER
CULTIVATION 33
TABLE 14: RUBBER CULTIVATION SUITABILITY AREA IN NEPAL 34
TABLE 15: COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF RUBBER PLANTATION 43
TABLE 16: COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF RICE FARMING 44
TABLE 17: COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF MAIZE FARMING 45
TABLE 18: COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL CROPS (RICE+MAIZE ) VS RUBBER 47
TABLE 19: HISTORICAL TIMELINE ON INITIATIVES FOR RUBBER CULTIVATION PROMOTION IN NEPAL 50

List of Figures
FIGURE 1: SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF SELECTED BIOCLIMATIC VARIABLES USED FOR MAPPING AND MODELLING 23
FIGURE 2: LAND HOLDING FOR RUBBER PLANTATION 26
FIGURE 2: FARMERS PERCEPTION ABOUT RUBBER PLANTATION 30
FIGURE 4: INCOME FROM RUBBER PLANTATION 31
FIGURE 5: THE JACKKNIFE TEST FOR EVALUATING THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES FOR RUBBER
PLANTATION.. 33
FIGURE 6: BENEFIT OF RUBBER AND CONVENTION CROP 47

6
 List of Maps
MAP 1: MAP OF STUDY AREA 14
MAP 2: LOCAL LEVEL WITH RUBBER PLANTATION BASED ON CURRENT PLANTATION 25
MAP 3: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING IN SELECTED DISTRICTS 35
MAP 4: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF BANKE DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 37
MAP 5: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF DANG DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 37
MAP 6: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF ILLAM DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 38
MAP 7: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF JHAPA DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 38
MAP 8: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF KANCHANPUR DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 39
MAP 9: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF MORANG DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 39
MAP 10: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF SAPTARI DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 40
MAP 11: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF SUNSARI DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 40
MAP 12: HABITAT SUITABILITY MAPPING OF SUNSARI DISTRICT BY LOCAL LEVEL 41

List of Annexes
ANNEX 1: SURVEY CHECKLIST AND FIELD FORMS 59
ANNEX 2: NAME OF PARTICIPANTS IN CONSULTATION MEETING WITH DFO 63
ANNEX 3: NAME OF PARTICIPANTS IN LOCAL LEVEL CONSULTATION 63
ANNEX 4: NAME LIST OF HOUSEHOLD SURVEYED 64
ANNEX 5: PARTICIPANTS IN FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION 65
ANNEX 6: GPS COORDINATE OF RUBBER PLANTATION LOCATION 66
ANNEX 7: LIST OF PRIVATE RUBBER FIRM 67
ANNEX 8: DETAIL OF COST AND BENEFIT FOR OPPORTUNITY COST ANALYSIS 68

7
Acronyms

AFPC Agroforestry Promotion Centre

AFU Agriculture and Forestry University
AKC Agriculture Knowledge Centre
ANRPC Association of Natural Rubber Producing Country
BS Bikram Sambat
CATAS Chinese Academics of Tropical Agriculture Sciences
CF Community Forest
DFO Division Forest Office
DRC Dry Rubber Content
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FRTC Forest Research and Training Centre
GIS Global Information System
Ha Hectare
IRSG International Rubber Study Groups
NPC National Planning Commission
NRs Nepalese Rupees
PMAMP Prime Minister Agriculture Modernization Project
RM Rural Municipality
TFC Total Fixed Cost
TOR Terms of Reference
TVC Total Variable Cost
USA United States of America

8
 Executive Summary

Rubber is a multipurpose product which can be extracted from both natural and synthetic/
petroleum materials. There are 2000 species of plant (311 genera of 79 families) associated
with natural rubber production among them, Hevea brasiliensis is dominant. The rubber
growing plants require nearly tropical climatic conditions with 2000-3000 mm rainfall per
annum, relative humidity 70-95% and temperature between 21°C to 28°C. In Nepal, rubber
plantation was initiated in Jhapa district after the establishment of Gorakhkali Rubber Udhog
Limited. Furthermore, Gorakhkali Rubber Udyog Limited also supported farmers for growing
rubber in Jhapa, Morang districts under the leadership of various rubber experts. Many
studies have shown that the eastern part of the country is suitable for rubber plantations. In
Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari and Illam districts, private farmers are engaged in the rubber
plantations. Some community forests are also engaged in plantation activities. In this context,
if rubber plantation can be promoted and extended, it can create many employment and
income generation activities.

This study assesses the status and potentiality of rubber plantation in Nepal, focusing on
four districts of eastern Nepal. To complete the study 37 randomly selected rubber growing
households were interviewed from the Jhapa district along with 10 focus group discussions
with stakeholders, Experts interview, three consultations meetings with local level and rubber
industries was conducted. Moreover, government institutions like Division Forest Office,
Agriculture Knowledge centers were also consulted to identify the challenges and possible
strategies for promoting rubber in these districts. Financial analysis (opportunity cost) and
Maxent Modelling were also conducted to evaluate rubber plantation potential.

Based on the field consultation and the available data 553 Ha. of land is under rubber
plantation where 90 individual farmers, 6 community forests, 2 leasehold lands, 15 private
firms and 4 cooperatives are involved. More than 61% of the farmers have an area less than
one hectare where both paddy field and marginalized land is used for rubber plantation.
Around 25 ha. of rubber plantation is under multi-cropping system (Chilimkot tea garden)
where other areas are under monocropping. As rubber is a perennial crop and can grow up to
30 meters height, its shade inhibits the growth of the adjacent crop. Moreover, for daily
movement inside the forest for collection of latex, species intermixing is not preferred but up
to seven years of intercropping is encouraged. Having reliable seedling sources (budded
stumps) is significant challenges for farmers as they depend on seedling from India for
plantation.

Likert scale was used to test the farmer's perception about plantation in the study area. This
gives a clear scenario about the positive impact of rubber on their income and lifestyle. As
eastern Terai is facing Human-Wildlife conflict related problems, rubber can be the best
solution to minimize the problem of crop raiding. Though rubber gives higher income for
farmers after 7 years of plantation, it can create a financial strain for the first seven years if
they do not have an alternative source of income. Old and conventional technology in post
processing of rubber along with limited skilled manpower is a challenging issue for quality
rubber production. Moreover, various studies have shown different impacts on natural
vegetation, farmers were unaware about it. There is a need for scientific research on impacts
of rubber plantation on existing ecosystems before initiating large scale plantations which can
have impacts on landscape.

9
Habitat suitability mapping was conducted using both participatory and GIS mapping
methods. The Participatory mapping shows that around 17,900 ha area is suitable for growing
rubber in four eastern districts along with Udayapur and Sunsari. However, the maxent
modelling based on occurrence point shows that Jhapa, Mornag and Lower best of Illam are
highly suitable for growing rubber. Maxent modelling shows that around 180-thousand-
hectare land is highly suitable for growing rubber, with a maximum area under Jhapa. From
the financial analysis, the discounted cost was found to be 3,099,587 and discounted returns
5,963,321for one hectare. Rubber cultivation provides farmers an opportunity to improve
their incomes. By 30th year of rubber plantation cumulative benefits at discounted value
reaches Rs.2,863,734 compared to Rs. -730,551 for conventional crops. Even though the
opportunity cost of rubber plantation is higher, it is also a financial strain during the
approximately 7 years before a new crop can be harvested.

There is the huge potentiality of producing rubber in eastern districts of Nepal, and new
rubber industries are under establishment. There is need for multi-sectoral cooperation and
both public and private sectors need to be engaged to promote rubber cultivation in Nepal.
This will not only create job opportunity but also reduces the trade deficit in the rubber
sector. Financial subsidies, capacity building training to farmers, and policy to utilize barren
and marginalized land for rubber plantation need to be formulated. There is a need for
research on impacts on natural vegetation and financial sensitivity analysis considering
various scenarios for promoting rubber plantation.

10
Chapter I: INTRODUCTION

1.1 General Background

Rubber is an important multipurpose product made up of natural rubber and
synthetic/petroleum rubber materials. There are 79 families, 311 genera and 2000
species associated with natural rubber production. The various species associated with
rubber production are Hevea brasiliensis, Parthenium argentatum, Ficus elastica,
Manihot glaziovii, Taraxacum kok-saghyz etc. (Pandey et. al., 2020). Among those
species, Natural rubber is produced mainly from Hevea brasiliensis,which is a very
essential raw material for transportation, industry, defense and medicinal fields in the
world. The rubber used for the manufacture of more than 50,000 products, including
400 medical devices (Pandey et al.,2020). Originally natural rubber is collected from
Amazonia’s old growth forests.Nowadays Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, China, India are
major natural rubber producers globally (Min et al., 2019). The rubber holds the 3rd
largest position of the world industry after iron and steel (Pandey et. al, 2020), where
about 20 million of the world populations are directly dependent upon rubber for the
source of income. According to FAO, in 2010 worldwide 23 arab, 84 corer and 47 lakh
dollar rubber was imported, among which 80% was from Asia, on which also 70% was
from South East Asia (FAOSTAT, 2012). According to rubber policy of India (2019)
world production and consumption of natural rubber are around 12.40 and12.60
millions tons respectively. It has been estimated that by 2020 AD, the demand for
natural rubber is expected to cross 20,000 metric ton per year of Nepal. According to
the International Rubber Group, the World Natural Rubber plantation is above 13
Million hectares, and production is 13.6 million tones per year. And there are 90% small
farmers (less than 5%), who produce an average of 1.2 ton per hectare per year and
70% uses in tyres. The major natural rubber consumers are China, India, the USA, Japan,
Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia. Rubber is an internationally traded commodity, and the
price fluctuates by trend in economic growth, production in major producing countries
and demand in major consuming countries. In terms of carbon utilization, natural
rubber is an important crop and can grow well in degraded and barren land. Global
concern on increasing greenhouse gases, specifically carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,
has led to the search for various mitigation options. In this context, carbon
sequestration through managed rubber plantation is gaining importance.

Rubber plantation in Nepal started in 2046B.S. by Gorakhali Rubber Industry in Jhapa

district. Although a study by Indian Rubber experts in1994 shows that Nepal consumed
a total of 7,000 metric tons of natural rubber, no authentic data thereafter has been
found on the exact production and consumption of rubber in the country. According to
Central Bureau of Statistics (2018), the export of rubber and rubber related goods was
worth NRs. One Crore eighty-two lakhs in 2018,while total imports of the same year
wereworth NRs. Eight crore thirty lakhs. Thus, Nepal suffered a trade deficit of NRs.
Seven corers fifty-two lakhs in the year as mentioned earlier only in rubber related
goods. According to the Trade and Export Promotion Center, the Government of Nepal

11
(GoN), total imports of rubber and articles thereof import of Rs. 12,474,212,000 in fiscal
year 2018/019 (2075/76) andRs. 10, 907,686,0002019/20(FY 2076/077). The export
of Footwear 2018/19 (2075/76), is Rs. 938,734,000. And 2019/2020 (2076/2077) is
Rs. 786,217,000. The transport vehicles and parts thereof Import of Rs. 91,165,920,000
(FY 2075/076) 2018/19 is Rs. 65,027,946,000 (2076/77) (2019/2020) (Paudel et al.,
2020). As a high value-cash crop, value-added enterprise and demanding domestic
market, Nepal needs more than 12,000 metric ton of raw material and rubber related
consumption if the rubber industries are allowed to run full scale (Poudel et al., 2020).
So, there is the scope of fulfilling this gap by expanding rubber plantation in suitable
areas.Prime Minister Agriculture Modernization Project (PMAMP), Project
Implementation Unit, Rubber Zone,Jhapa is responsible for up- lifting the standard of
rubber cultivation in Nepal (PMAMP, 2019).

Rubber plants have 32 years of economic life but may live up to 100 years or even more
than that, depending on site quality. The plantation would start yielding from the 5-6th
year onwards. The natural rubber (latex) is processed to convert into a storable and
marketable form. The height of the rubber plant is about 30 m. They have trifoliate
leaves and are pollinated by insects. The 3 budded seed can burst up to 15-18m. The
latex can be extracted from any plant parts, but the high amount can be extracted from
the trunk. To achieve a high yield of rubber latex, good variety, high fertility of the soil
and appropriate cultural management both in the immature and tapping stage are
important (Onthong, 2015). The favorable condition required for rubber farming
includes the height of 450 masl, 5- 15° slope, the temperature of 21°C to 28°C, the
relative humidity of 70-95%, rainfall of 2,000-3,000 mm and pH of 4-6.5. Areas within 8
degrees north of the equator, 10 degrees south of the equator, high temperature,
altitude below 400 m and high humidity are the ideal conditions for the natural rubber-
producing plant (Yogish, 2017).

Many studies have shown that the eastern part of the country is suitable for rubber
plantations. In Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari and Illam districts, private farmers are engaged in
the rubber plantations. Some community forests are also involved in the plantation
activities.In this context, if rubber plantation can be promoted and extended in other
districts, it can create a large number of employment and income generation activities.
Therefore, this study will try to identify other probable sites for its plantation.
According to the different feasibility studies and pilot projects conducted by Gorakhkali
Rubber Udhyog Ltd. and Sudha Falras Private Ltd., together with the Department of
Agricultural surveys in Nepal in the year 2047 B.S., more than 15,000 hectares of
marginal productivity areas are potential for commercial rubber farming in Jhapa,
Morang, Sunsari and lower parts of Ilam districts (DoA, 2013). Globally and locally,
Natural rubber is primarily grown by the smallholders, and 91% of rubber planted area
ad 92% of production is in smallholders’ sector (below 10 ha) (DoC, 2019). To collect
data on rubber plantation area, production and productivity and farmers engagement in
rubber plantation Ministry of Agriculture and Development has done a study of rubber

12
plantation with the objectives of collecting information on rubber industry status and
problems related with its extension, but no extensive research has been conducted to
analyze it’s on plantations status in different land management categories and
plantation natures. Therefore, this study will assess rubber plantation on other land
practices such as fertile, degraded and rehabilitated land and analysis its ownership
namely private, public and communal. This study will help to formulate policy packages
for rubber plantation program in all suitable districts to reduces the import of rubber
and improve the local community economy.

1.2 History of Rubber plantation in Nepal

The history of rubber plantation has a direct relation with the Gorakhkali Rubber
Industry. The Gorakhkali Rubber Udhyog Limited was established in 2041 BS with the
aid of the Chinese government. Due to economic barriers and political disturbance, the
industry failed to continue its production but marketed its important contribution in
rubber plantation. According To Pioneer Rubber Researcher, (Tilak Bhandari, Tirtha Raj
Khanal and SuklalThakali (who worked in GorakhkaliRubberIndustry rubber industry
for more than 15 years) the first recorded plantation was in Sanischare of Jhapa district
under SudhaFal Ras Pvt.Ltd. in 2046. Pioneer plantation was done in 5ha and later on, it
was expanded to 20 ha. The task force was formed with the coordination between the
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Forestry and Gorakhkali Rubber Industry in 2050
BS. In the same year Rubber Development Board was also established. According to
Tilak Bhandari 1994 and Khanal, 2003 the Indian team gave an optimistic note on the
promising potential of rubber cultivation in Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari and Ilam of Nepal.
For rubber upliftment, Crop Development division under the Department of Agriculture
was handed in 2052 B.S. In 2053 B.S. Kalika CF and Adarsha Namuna CF started a
rubber plantation for the first time in a community forest. Since then, rubber plantation
was expanded to private lands of Jhapa, Ilam and even in Tarhara of Sunsari and
Biratnagar, Morang. Rubber plantations have not been expanded in Sunsari and Morang
even though there are initiatives. Farmers were very excited about the benefit
generated from rubber farming but Gorakhkali failed to continue in 2056 BS and
resulted into the downfall of farmer’s motivation. From 2061 B.S Crop Development
Directorate started subsidy for rubber cooperatives. In late 60s’ The Institute of Rubber
and Jatropha Research- Nepal was established by non-resident Nepalese of America in
the leadership of Professor Dr. Megh Nath Parajuli- President and Founding Executive
Director Mr. Tilak Bhandari. Since then different cooperatives and research centres
been established. Recently Green Tyre Factory Biratnagar have started tyre production.
In addition, rubber plantation was experimented with in the eastern part of Nepal and
tested in Gorkha and Chitwan by Gorakhkali. Unfortunately, due to soil and
topographical character of these areas no more rubber plantation exists.

13
1.3 Objectives
The assignment’s main objectiveis to assess the present status and potentiality mapping
of rubber plantation in Nepal. The specific objectives include:
● Present status of rubber plantation in Nepal
o Plantation status in monocropping and multi-cropping (intercropping)
o Plantation status in different land category (fertile, degraded and
rehabilitation land)
o Plantation status in public, private and community forest land
● Potentiality of rubber plantation in Nepal
o Financial analysis of rubber plantations: Opportunity cost of the
agricultural lands
o Identify other potential sites for the rubber plantation
o People’s perception towards rubber plantation
o Identify the shortcoming on rubber plantation and suggests the
appropriate options to encourage and extend the rubber plantations

1.4 Scope of the work

Rubber plantation has tremendous opportunities. However, its study is limited to the
broad estimation of plantation area, industrial potentiality, problems and prospects.
Therefore, this study aims to explore the details of rubber plantation status in the
different land category with the nature of its plantation. This study will also analyze the
opportunity cost of the agricultural land with the rubber plantation to explore its other
potentiality. Natural rubber (Hevea brasiliensi) has a unique silvicultural characteristic
that makes its plantation suitable for limited areas only. At present only four districts of
the country are practicing rubber plantation. Therefore, this study will identify other
probable sites for its plantation, primarily focusing on the plants silvicultural and sites
characteristics.

14
 Chapter II: Methodology

2.1 Study Area

For this study Jhapa, Morang, Illam and Sunsari were selected to assessing the status,
people perception and evaluate the opportunity cost on rubber plantation(Map 1).
These districts represent both Terai and Siwalik mountain regions of Nepal, where sub-
tropical forest is dominant,and agroforestry mixed in tea is the dominant
vegetation.These eastern most districts receive the highest amount of precipitation
(more than 3000m per annum) per annum and have an average temperature between
20- 30OC.

Map 1: Map of Study Area

According to Yogish (2017) rubber can be grown in 5-15oslope with in 450-meter

altitude from sea level. Since Terai region of Nepal have higher temperature and have
higher relative humidity more than 70-90%. Terai region elevations varies from 63m to
330m above the seas level and is gently slopped with 2-10m per kilometer (LRMP,
1986). The Terai Region is located in a sub-tropical climatic zone characterized by hot
and humid summer, monsoon rainfall ranging from 1138 mm to 2680 mm per annum.
As rubber required hot and humid climatic condition, during maxent modelling all Terai
districts along with Makwanpur, Udayapur, Gorkha and Tanahu were also considered to

15
analyze the potentiality of rubber plantation. Based on expert consultation in Gorkha
and Tanahu rubber plantation was initiated during the Gorakhkali Rubber Udhog but
now there is no any plant, so these districts are also considered for maxent modeling.

2.2 Methods and Activities

To successfully complete of this assignment, the consultant team applied mix methods
and approaches and information gathered from various secondary (Published and
unpublished) sources.

2.3.1 Review of Information

One of the significant activities in the inception phase was to review relevant
documents/literature, which guide to develop questionnaire and checklist for the
survey. The publication from Ministry of Commerce and Industries, Ministry of
Agriculture, Ministry of Forests and Environment were reviewed thoroughly for
exploring the preliminary status of rubber plantation in Nepal. We collect and review
other relevant materials during the inception period and the entire study as well.
Reports and publication from department of cottage and small-scale industry, Ministry
of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, IRJR-Nepal, Ministry of Industry and
Commerce, Rubber Board-India, Malaysian Rubber Boar, Association of Rubber
Producing Countries, (ANRPC) Malaysia, International Rubber Research and
Development Board,(IRRDB (Malaysia), International Rubber Study Groups (IRSG),
World Bank etc. were collected and reviewed. Similarly, other scientific and technical
reports were also reviewed for case studies and financial analysis.

2.3.2 Consultation with FRTC

Consultations and effective and regular communication among concerned stakeholder

is the bottom line to complete this assignment. We maintain regular communication,
consultations and discussion with the technical coordinator to supervise and oversee
this assignment. The initial consultation with technical coordinator helped to finalize
location for field consultation, discussion on-field activities and finalization of location
on case study. An inception workshop was conducted in FRTC for the finalization of the
work plan, protocol and data collection sheets. Comments and suggestion were
incorporated before submission of final inception report.

2.3.3 Designing and Finalization of the Survey Toolkits

An immediate discussion was followed after the contract signing with FRTC for
developing a work plan and survey toolkit. The discussion mainly focused to finalizing
the overall framework; type and sources of data, the structure of the report and the
toolkits; questionnaire for survey, FGDs and case study. As per TOR data collected from

16
various sources, the following tables show the types of survey tools adopted for each
information source and the types of data collected.

Table 1: Source of survey tools adopted for collection data

Source of Information Methods / tools for information collection
Consultation with DFO (Jhapa, Ilam, Morang, Checklist and field forms
Sunsari)
Consultation with Krishi GyanKendra (Ilam, Jhapa Checklist and field forms
and Sunasari)
Consultation with Local Level Checklist and field forms
Household Survey Questionnaire
Focus Group discussion with Farmers and PMAMP, Checklist
Rubber zone
Case study Observation and field form
Discussion with Rubber Industries Checklist
The checklist and household survey questionnaire are kept in Annex 1.

2.3.4 Field Execution (data collection)

Immediately after completion of orientation training to field enumerator, the consultant

started data collection. The entire consultant team member visited the field in Jhapa,
Morang, Ilam and Sunasari district. During those visits, there were series of meeting
with relevant stakeholders. The expert team also conducted consultation with local
level authorities, rubber manufacturing industry, district forest officers, Krishi Gyan
Kendra to assess the status, potentiality and perception on rubber plantation.
2.3.4.1 Consultation meetings and Discussion

A. Consultation meeting with Division Forest office

Consultation meeting with division forest was conducted in all four-division forest office
prior to conducting household survey and consultation with the local level. This meeting
helped in the identification of households for survey, potential area for conducting case
study etc. Detail of people consulted in the DFO meeting is kept in Annex 2.
Location No. of meeting Purpose of meeting
Jhapa, Morang, 4 ● Location (local levels) growing rubber plantation
Suasari and Ilam ● Types of land used for rubber plantation
● Types of cropping practices for rubber cultivation
● Efforts and activities from DFO for rubber
plantation
● Impacts of rubber plantation in native vegetation
● Rubber plantation in community and collaborative
forests

B. Consultation meeting with Krishi Gyan Kendra

Consultation meetings with Krishi Gyan Kendra were
conducted to measure the perception on rubber
plantation, method and tools adopted to grow
rubber. This meeting also helped to assess the status
of rubber plantation in selected district. All Krishi

17
Gyan Kendra in ILam, Jhapa as Sunsari were visited during field visit.
Location Name and position Discussed subject area
Ilam Toni Bardewa, Head of ● Area of growing rubber plantation (potential map)
Krishi Gyankendra ● Types of land used for rubber plantation
Jhapa Rabindra Subedi, Chief ● Types of farmer engage in rubber plantation
(PMAMP) Officer ● Types of cropping practices for rubber cultivation
Sunsari Jyoti Timilsina, ● Efforts from institution to encourage rubber industry
Yogendra Yadav, and plantation
Information Officer ● Prospect and challenges in growing rubber plantation
● Mapping of potential sites (by districts) for rubber
plantation
● Identification of potential sites for case studies

C. Consultation meeting with Local level

After identification of local levels growing rubber plants, selected local level authorities
were consulted during field execution. This meeting identified households
(area/toles/hamlets) for questionnaire survey, potential area for conducting case study,
perception on rubber plantation and opportunity for growing rubber in particular
district. Detail of people consulted in local level consultation meeting is kept in Annex 3.

Location, name and Purpose of meeting

position
Kachankabal RM ● Area of growing rubber plantation (potential map)
Mai Municipality ● Types of land used for rubber plantation
Kankai Municipality ● Types of farmer engage in rubber plantation
● Types of cropping practices for rubber cultivation
● Preference of community in plantation in community and private
forestry
● Mapping of area for growing rubber plant
● Perception of farmers on rubber cultivation
● Efforts from local level to encourage rubber industry and plantation
● Prospect and challenges in growing rubber plantation

D. Discussion with Rubber industries

Discussion with two rubber industries, namely Green Type factory, Biratnagar and
Kankai Rubber industries, Surunga, Jhapa
which are using Nepalese product were
consulted during field visit. This visit helps
in the financial analysis along with the
potentiality of growing rubber in Nepal.
Moreover, this discussion also identified
the constraints and challenges associated
with rubber plantation in Nepal.
Furthermore, the consultant team also
discussed existing policy and its
implication on expanding rubber
cultivation in Nepal.

18
E. Consultation with Community forest Users Groups
Five community forests were consulted during field activities where rubber plantation
was found. This consultation meeting focused on source of seedling, impacts on native
ecology, methods of planation and working mechanism. The person responsible for the
management of rubber and its marketing was consulted.

Table 2: Name of Community forest consulted during field

SN CF Name Consulted person Position
1 Kalika CF, Mechinagar Yogesh Bhattarai Chair
2 AadarshaNamuna, Buddhashanti Mina Adhikari Secretary
3 Jamunbari, Jamunkhadi KhyamSitaula Chair
4 Telpaani , Bahundangi MaiyaUpreti Secretary
5 Hariyali, Urlabari Jit Bahadur Khadka Secretary

2.3.4.2 Household survey

The household survey was one of the primary sources of information for this
assignment which was conducted employing interview technique using a pre-tested
semi-structured questionnaire (Annex 1). Even though records in government reports
(reports of Agriculture Knowledge Center) shows that farmers are engaged in the
plantation of rubber in Jhapa, Ilam, Morang and Sunsari, farmers only in Jhapa district
are engaged in rubber plantation. Among 90 farmers reported to have engaged in
rubber plantation in Jhapa, 37 farmers from Jhapa district were selected for
interviewing (See Annex 4 for list of farmers interviewed). Snowball sampling
techniques was adopted to identify sampling HHs. Household were selected after
mapping households growing rubber in different local level in consultation with
PMAMP, rubber zone authorities and expert consultation.

The semi-structure questionnaire for the household survey included the following
component
● Area and location of rubber plantation
● Plantation in community forest and other forest
● Types of land used for rubber plantation
● Cropping methods
● Source of seedling and methods of plantation
● Detail cost and benefit from rubber plantation
● Potentiality of growing rubber (expansion of area)
● Opportunity and Challenges associated with rubber cultivation
● Perception on rubber cultivation

During household survey people perception in rubber plantation was measured

considering following factor
● Increase productivity
● Reduces labour cost compared to agriculture land

19
 ● Assures more financial return compared to agriculture land
● Potentiality of being alternative source of income
● Potentiality of expanding as commercial plantation
● Likelihood of considering for loan and financial support
● Potentiality of covering under insurance mechanism
2.3.4.3 Focus group discussion

Focus group discussions with farmers, experts, organization working for rubber
promotion were conducted. In total 10 focus group discussion was conducted during
this assignment where consultation with a different government, cooperatives and
farmers was conducted (Table 3).Among which five focus group discussion was
conducted to assess the perception, potentiality of growing rubber and identification of
the potential area for growing rubber. Focus group discussion also focused on issues,
challenges and opportunities of growing in their location. Detail of people consulted in
focus group discussion is kept in Annex 5.

Table 3: Detail of Focus Group discussions

SN Location Organization No of Participants
1 Ilam Divisional Forest Office 4
2 Urlabari, Morang Hariyali community forest 3
3 Jhapa Rubber Zone 3
4 Jhapa PMAMP 3
5 Buddhashanti-3, Farmers 4
Jhapa
6 Damak, Jhapa Cooperative group 3
7 Ilam AKC, 3
8 Sunsari AKC, 3
9 Morang Division Forest office 4
10 Mechinagar-11 Farmers+expert+ industry 5

Moreover, during field execution number of personnel working in the sector of rubber
were identified and consulted. These consultation meetings focused on the history of
rubber plantation, cost and benefit of rubber crop, advantage over other agriculture
crop, methods of propagation, collection of high-quality rubber, perception on rubber
plantation etc. In total six experts having depth knowledge on rubber plantation were
consulted.

Table 4: Detail of consulted Experts

Name Expertise / Position
Mr. Tilak Bhandari International Rubber Expert, Executive Director IRJR-Nepal, USA Member
Secretary- Agriculture Promotion Committee, NRNA and Visiting Scientist-
RECAST, Tribhuwan University, Chief of Rubber Research, Scientist, former
employee of Gorakhali Rubber Udhog and Member Secretary Rubber
Development Board
Mr. Tirtha Khanal Former Employ of Gorkahali Rubber Udhyog Ltd and Technical Officer in
rubber plantation in Jhapa

20
Mr. SukalalThakali Former Employ of Gorkahali Rubber Udhyog and Technical Officer in
rubber plantation in Jhapa
Mr. Pt Bhutiya Worked in rubber plantation in India, Operate rubber nursery at
Rangedada
Mr. Raju Paudel Manager at Chilimkot area rubber plantation, Former employeeof rubber
industry of India
Mr. Khem BK Manager at Initiated rubber plantation in Ratuwmai plantation area

2.3.6.4 Case study for opportunity cost analysis

One site was identified for conducting a case study for financial analysis of the
opportunity cost of rubber plantation. This site was selected after an interview with the
farmer and focus group discussion. Land with same environmental factor, soil types was
selected in consultation with farmers. Mr. Narayan Dhakal aged 61, of Buddhashanti 3,
Jhapa was selected for the case study. Dhakal owns 20 kattha of land in which 10 kattha
has been allocated for rubber plantation and rest of the land for agriculture purposes.
Mr. Dhakal had started a rubber plantation in 2070 BS but haven’t been able to make
any income out of his garden. Around 180 rubber plants with a spacing of 11*11ft are
planted.

Table 5: Detail cost considered for calculation of opportunity cost

Material Cost Labour Cost Extraction Cost

1. Planting material 5. Land preparation cost 12. Trapping Cost
(seedling cost) 6. Digging and Pitting cost
2. Shading Materials 7. Plantation cost
3. Manure and fertilizer 8. Shading
cost 9. Weeding
4. Insecticides and 10. Manure application cost
pesticide cost 11. Insecticide and pesticide
application cost

2.3 Mapping of Rubber Potential Area

Potential area for growing rubber plantation was mapped using both participatory
mapping methods and maximum-entropy algorithm (Maxent) modelling methods.
During participatory mapping, consultation with an expert was conducted to map
potential area. Similarly, the Maxent model was used for mapping potential area for
growing rubber plantation in Terai district of the Nepal on GIS platform.All 22 Terai and
other districts namely Makwanpur, Udayapur, Gorkha and Tanahu were taken into
consideration for maxent modelling using GIS mapping. This allowed to calculate the
area potential for growing rubber in selected districts.

The Maxent modelling software is based on the maximum-entropy approach which is

used for modelling species niches and distributions especially based on point of absence
or presence. Using set of environmental grids (bioclimatic) and georeferenced

21
occurrence, the maxent model expresses the probability distribution. Each grids cell has
predicted suitability condition for the selected species with probability distribution
ranging from 0 to 1 (Coban et al., 2020). Under particular assumptions about the input
data and biological sampling points, the output can be interpreted as predicted
probability of presence or absence in particular location. GPS location of existing block
of plantation was recorded for maxent modeling (Annex 6).

2.4 Data compilation and Analysis

The main work of this task was to assimilate all the activities and works carried out
during field works. We gathered all relevant information through literature review,
district forest office, PMAMP, rubber zones, private company etc. That information was
collated and compiled in the required format.

▪ The output tables and charts obtained from the statistical analysis are simple
and interpretable, which are then presented in different charts, tables and
diagrams in the report.
▪ Likert scale in Agreement (5 points): Fully Disagree – Disagree- Neither agree
nor disagree – Agree – Fully Agree was used to measure the perception of
farmers towards rubber plantation.

2.4.1 Cost, Return and profitability

Total cost, total fixed cost ad total variable cost was calculated to evaluate the cost,
return ad profitability of the both rubber and conventional crop (maize and rice). Total
costs are the sum of total fixed cost and total variable costs (Babu, 1989 and Poudel,
et.a., 2020).
TC = TFC + TVC
Where,
TC = Total cost, TFC = Total Fixed Cost, TVC = Total Variable Cost

Variable cost refers to recurring type of costs and is also defined as operational cost
Total variable cost is computed by multiplying the amount of variable input by per unit
price of input. I following variable costs were considered for this study:

TVC = Clabour + Cmanure + Cothers

Where,
C labour = Total cost of labour., C manure = Total cost of manure, C fertilizers = Total cost
of chemical fertilizers, C others = cost of seedlings, pesticides, rubber coat, formic acid.

Fixed cost refers to the cost that remains unchanged irrespective of the level of output
produced. In this study, land rent, depreciation of tools, equipment’s, machineries were
included under fixed cost.

22
 TFC = C land rent+ C depreciation
Where, C land rent = Total land rent per year in NRs. and C depreciation = Total
depreciation cost in NRs.
Depreciation was computed using straight line method at the rate of 10% per annum on
an average for different equipments used in rubber orchards such as tapping knives,
latex bowl, wire, bucket, drum, motor, pump set etc.

2.4.2 Opportunity Cost Analysis

Opportunity costs represent the potential benefits an individual, agriculture land owner
misses out on when choosing one alternative over another. Form this case study loos or
sacrifice incurred by deciding taken plant rubber plant instead of regular agriculture
crop will be estimated.

Opportunity Cost=FO−CO
where:FO=Return on best foregone option; CO=Return on chosen option

2.4.3 Maxent modelling

The maximum-entropy algorithm (Maxent) was applied to predict the potential
distribution of this species. In total 22 environmental variables (19 bioclimatic and
three topographic) and all field-based occurrence points were used to develop the
model (Table 6). For climatic layers, we used 19 bioclimatic variables (Table 6) by
Hijmans et al., (2005) which is produced as interpolated the topographic factor. Climatic
layers produced as interpolated climatic surfaces for global land (Figure 1) other than
Antarctica using 1950- 2000 climatic data was used (Hijmans et al. 2005). Moreover, the
topographic variables were taken from DEM map of Nepal.

23
Figure 1: Spatial distribution of selected bioclimatic Variables used for mapping and
modelling

Table 6: Bioclimatic Variables and their description

S.N. Bioclimatic Description
variables
1 Bio-1 Annual mean temperature (20-300C)
2 Bio_2 Mean diurnal range (mean ox monthly – max and min temp)
3 Bio_3 Isothermality (100*mean diurnal range/annual temp range) or
(Bio_2/Bio_7*100)
4 Bio_4 Temperature Seasonality (Std. Dev*100)
5 Bio_5 Max temp. of warmest month
6 Bio_6 Min Temp of Coldest Month
7 Bio_7 Temperature annual range
8 Bio_8 Mean temp. of warmest quarter
9 Bio_9 Mean temp. of driest quarter
10 Bio_10 Mean temp. of warmest quarter
11 Bio_11 Mean temp. of coldest quarter
12 Bio_12 Annul Precipitation (more than 3000mm)
13 Bio_13 Precipitation in wettest month
14 Bio_14 Precipitation in driest month
15 Bio_15 Precipitation seasonality (coefficient of variation)
16 Bio_16 Precipitation of wettest quarter
17 Bio_17 Precipitation in driest quarter
18 Bio_18 Precipitation of wettest quarter
19 Bio_19 Precipitation of coldest quarter
20 Topo_1 Slope in degree (5-150)
21 Topo_2 Aspect
22 Topo_3 Elevation (with in 450 m from masl)

After completion of distribution modelling and mapping, we assess the statistical

significance to measure the quality and accuracy of the study. Jackknife procedure
under Maxent modelling was used to examine the importance of individual variables for
model prediction. Jackknife procedure predicts the importance environmental
covariates under the basis of area curve gain for three different scenarios (without
variable, with only one variable and with all variables). Beside this, Receiver Operating
Characteristics (ROC) area under curve method was used to evaluate the model’s
goodness of fit and model with higher area under curve (AUC) value was considered as
best performer. It measures the predictive performances of the model by comparing the
ability of the model for random predication and suitability probability value ranges
from 0 to 1. The final suitability probability map value was further regrouped into four
classes for interpretation i.e. less than 0.2 as unsuitable, 0.2-0.4 as low suitable, 0.4 to
0.6 as moderately suitable and more than 0.6 as highly suitable.

24
 Chapter III: Results and Findings

3.1Present status of rubber plantation in Nepal

3.1.1 Area under rubber plantation

According to the PMAMP record, the total area of rubber plantation in Jhapa district
covers 296 ha of land. Simialrly, around 50 ha. of land is covered by scatter trees in tea
garden which are not listed in PMAMP project.10 local level (Rural and Urban
Municipalities) namely Bhadrapur, Damak, Mechinagar, Kachankabal, Kankai,
Baradashi, Birtamode, Buddhashanti, Arjundhara and Haldibari are the plantation sites
of in Jhapa district (Map 2). Chilimkot tea and rubber garden under Sanghai Group in
Danabari of Ilam with area of 167 ha (163ha Sitali block and 4ha Shoktim block) is the
only plantation site of Ilam district. However, according to task the team report of
feasibility study on rubber plantation, around 10 ha of area is covered by scatter trees
in Lam. In Morang, HariyaliCommunity forest with 5 ha plantation containing around
500 trees. and Eastern Rubber Co-operative Limited 10ha is currently under rubber
plantation. Agriculture Knowledge Centre, Inaruwa of Sunsari have recorded 10ha
plantation area in Morang (5 hectare in Hariyali CF) and Sunsari. In total it is estimated
that around 553hectare of the total area is under rubber cultivation containing 287550
trees (Table 4).

Table 7: Rubber plantation districts and their area.

S.N. District Area No. of Name of Local Level
(ha) Trees
1 Jhapa, listed in under 296 159,947 Bhadrapur, Damak, Mechinagar,
PMAMP Kachankabal, Kankai,
2 Jhapa, Other scatter trees 50 26050* BaradashiBirtamode, Buddhashanti,
in tea garden not covered Arjundhara and Haldibari
by PMAMP
3 Ilam, Chilimkot tea and 167 84923 Mai Municipality, Danabari
rubber garden
4 Illam, scatter trees 10 5210* Unidentified
5 Morang, Hariyali 5 500 Urlabari
Community forest
Morang, Eastern Rubber 10 1000 Urlabari
Co-operative Limited
6 Morang, other private 5 4710* Unidentified
land
4 Sunsari 10 5210* As per Krishi Gyankendra Report
area unidentified
Total 553 287550
Source: Field survey, review of PMAMP report, Rubber zone report and *Task team report,
2075

25
 Map 2: Local level with rubber plantation based on current plantation

3.1.2 Ownership of rubber plantation

Rubber plantation is generally focused on private farmland, community forest and on
the land owned by cooperative groups. As rubber is labour intensive and can create
higher employment opportunities, young manpower is motivated to initiate rubber
plantation. Plantation in government-leased land was found to cover the highest
proportion of land in both Ilam and Jhapa. According to PMMP report and consultation
with stakeholder 5 co-operatives, 5 community forests, 4 cooperatives and 90
individual farmers in Jhapa area engaged in a rubber plantation.

Table 8: land ownership and area under rubber plantation

S.N. Description Number Area (ha) Name
1 Community 6 44.5 1. Kalika CF, mechanagarJhapa, 5.5. ha
forestry 2. AadarshaNamuna CF, BuddhashantiJhapa- 5 ha
3. Jamunbari CF, Jamunkhadi, Jhapa- 8 ha
4. Telpani CF, Bahungadi, Jhapa- 2.5 ha
5. Manakamana CF, Jhapa – 15.5 ha
6. Hariyali CF, Uralabari Morang- 8 ha
2 Leasehold land 2 262.8 1. Chilimkot tea and rubber garden, Ilam- 167 ha
2. Jalkanya Agroforestry- 95.8
3 Private firm 15 35.4 Annex 7

26
4 Individual 90 164.8
farmers
5 Cooperatives 5 45.5 1. Natural rubber agriculture cooperative
2. Barhadashikirshisahakarisanstha ltd
3. Prenakirshisahakarisanstha ltd.
4. Bahu sahakarisanstha, Damak
5. Eastern Rubber Co-operative Limited
Source: Field survey, review of PMAMP report and Rubber zone report

3.1.3 Land holding size

It was found that a large number of respondents have a land holding of less than 1 ha for
rubber plantation, especially smallholders of Jhapa district Private land. Plantation by
Tea industry, Agroforestry promotion centre and community forests mostly cover the
area more than 5 ha. Similarly, 9.09 % of the respondents have area between 1 to 2 ha
and 2-5 ha (Figure 2). All total 44 respondents were considered for analyzing land
holding size including farmers, community forests, leasehold lands and plantation by
cooperatives.

20.45%
<1 ha
Area between 1-2 ha
9.09%
area between 2-5
61.36%
9.09% more than 5 ha

Figure2: Land holding for rubber plantation

3.1.4 Major types of land used for rubber plantation

The type of land use for rubber plantation mostly consists of riverine sandy soil. Some
farmers planted rubber tree in the paddy growing field and tea orchard where the
production is minimum. Moreover, Eastern part of Jhapa is susceptible to Human
Elephant conflict. People living here used to face the problem like crop raiding every
year (Neupane et. al., 2018). They were looking for an alternative source of living and
they found Rubber plantation as the best possible option. Rubber plantation done in
farmland was used for paddy production as an alternative of crop, minimizing the crop
damage by elephant.

27
Rubber trees are susceptible to water logging area and were found that slightly sloppy
area encourages the surface runoff of the water. In case of heavy soil area where water
logging is potential and shanking and swelling is liable rubber plant contains low Dry
Rubber Content (DRC) in comparison to dry area (Clermont-Dauphin et al., 2012). In the
large-scale plantation like in Range Danda, the land was found to be sandy loam.
Similarly, the plantation site in Ilam was dry sloppy land which was very rich in Iron
content. Dry, sandy-loam, non-water-logged area with iron content is very suitable for
growing rubber.

3.1.5Types of cropping (cropping pattern)

Though the rubber plants bear tap root system,
horizontal movement of roots discourages
intercropping after 5-6 years for plantation. However,
during the initial phase of the rubber plantation, the
land area is not fully occupied by the rubber plants and
inter spaces are available in the plantation which
receive plenty of sunlight. Ginger and turmeric can be
grown only up to 4th year from plantation
(Langenberger et al., 2017). Intermixing plantation Photo: Tea and Rubber Intercropping
with tea was not much successful in Chilimkot area. As discussed with experts it was
found that rubber plantation with honey bee can be viable opinion as rubber trifoliate
system allows bee to extract nectar for honey. Private farmers with small land holding
do not have much knowledge about honey bee keeping in a mixture of rubber plant.

Table 9: Types of cropping pattern found in study area

S.N. Types of cropping Species mixture Area (Ha) Location
1 Monocropping - 517.7
2 Intercropping Tea +rubber 25 Chimkot, Danabari,Sanischare and
Prithivinagar
Rubber+ginger+lemon 0.3 BaradasiandBudhabare
Source: Field survey, review of PMAMP report and Rubber zone report

In Chilimkot tea and rubber plantation area few Sal tree are kept as shading trees newly
plantation sites (6 years old rubber plantation). Similarly, in Damak area of Jhapa
private owner under cooperative plantation planted Teak and bamboo as wind break.

3.1.6Soil Types (Texture class) and pH

The suitability of a soil for a rubber plantation is very much dependent on physical and
chemical properties (Orimoloye et al., 2010). Soil is the principal factor to be considered for
rubber land use suitability. Based on the soil texture, loamy or sandy loamy soil is suitable for
rubber cultivation since it is easier to work and requires only moderate irrigation. Soil in the
rubber growing tract is mostly laterite, lateritic, red and alluvial and is reported to be deficient
in P and K. From the prospective of soil nutrients, rubber needs a modest level of the

28
nutrients, in contrast to coffee, tea, coconut or palm oil (Yogish, 2017 and Orimoloye et al.,
2010).

The acidity of the soil based on the pH is another consideration before plantation of the
rubber tree. Previous research regarding the pH of soil reported that slightly acidic soil (pH
ranging from 4.8 to 5.9) is highly suitable for the rubber plantation (Orimoloye et al., 2010 and
Yogish, 2017). The acidic soil inhibits plant growth, resulting from a variety of specific
factors and interactions between these factors. In general, acid soil is deficient in P, K, Ca,
Mg, S, B and Mo(Ugwa et al., 2005).

3.1.7Source of seedling and methods of plantation

Rubber tree is perennial which can grow up to 30 meters of height. The young plant
shows a characteristic growth pattern of an alternating period of rapid elongation and
consolidated development (Roy et al., 2014). Flowers are small but appearing in large
clusters. Fruits are three lobed, each holding three seeds. The seeds are oil bearing.
Rubber seeds lose viability very rapidly if left in the field. Therefore, the seeds are
picked up daily during the seed fall season and quickly transported to nurseries for
germination. In raised beds germination starts after 6 to 7 days of sowing. Germinated
seeds have young roots emerging first as the ideal stage for nursery plantation (Roy et
al., 2014; Warren-Thomas et al., 2019). Bud grafting was found to be the most common
practice in rubber seedling development. Bud grafting is the replacement of the shoot
system of a plant with that of another more desirable plant. In plantation sites of
eastern Nepalbudded stumps were found to be imported from Assam, India and very
few developed within Jhapa.

For rubber tree plantation, each pit of size 3ft*3ft is the minimum requirement.
However size and shape of the pit (hole) depends on the soil condition and size of
planting materials. In fertile and soft soils, the pit can be 25-30 cm diameter and 40-45
deep. In poor andhard soils, bigger pits are required from 40-45 cm diameter to 50-60
cm deep (Testado, 2013). In flat and sloppy land, the distance between each tree varies.
16*16 ft in flat land and 10*20ft in sloppy land are the most commonly preferred
distances. However, the choice of the planting distance largely depends on the
topography and possibility of planting intercrops (Testado, 2013). In addition, soil
treatment with NPK and locally available cow dung were also used. As rubber
production depends mainly on the high rate of fertilizer supplementation because
rubber is high nutrient demanding crop, especially during the early phase of the
development usually up to 6 years fertilizer application is essential(Meti et al., 2002 and
Orimoloye et al., 2010).

3.1.8 Silviculture treatment for rubber cultivation

Rubber plantation does not need varieties of silviculture treatments, but some are very
important. Rubber tree shows the negative response to excessive water. The late

29
monsoon is regarded as the best time for pitting. As plantation is done in regular
spacing over 12 ft in studies area, there is enough space for other species to suspend the
growth of rubber plant for the first three years of the plantation so cleaning should be
done twine a year for first 3 years of plantation. Pruning can cause fungal infection and
loss in rubber content therefore manual pruning must be avoided. During the nursery
phase mulching should be considered as a catalyst for vigorous growth of germinating
seedlings. Cow dung, Urea, MOP, RP etc. must be applied twice a year during the month
of April-May and September -October to enhance the nutrient content in the plantation
stand. The uneven gap between the individual trees can cause huge loss and damage the
crop, so instead of thinning gap filling should be done in the first 3 years of plantation.
After 3 years, the crown cover of rubber suppressed the growth of understory species
and plant will always remain dwarf.

Table 10: summary of silviculture treatment for rubber plantation

Types of land preparation Months Remarks
Pitting Bhadra terracing and pitting in Ilam
Weeding - As per requirement
Cleaning twice a year for first 3 years
Pruning Usually self-pruning, no branching up to 8 ft.
Mulching including fertilizer during nursery preparation
Manuring April-May/ sept-oct twice a year; cow dung, urea, MOP, RP
Thinning never Harmful
Source: Field survey and Tjitrosemito, 1996 Testado, 2013

3.2 Perception on rubber cultivation

3.2.1 Farmers perceptionon rubber plantation

From the Likert scale test, it was found that 100% of respondents strongly agreed that
the rubber plantation increases the productivity of the land. As Rubber is done in sandy
loam soil people have bad experience of production with other agricultural crops.
Rubber is labour intensive work but 82.35% of respondents strongly agreed that it
reduces labour cost compared to agriculture land. Moreover, 7.84% of the respondent
did not answer on reducing the cost of labor. Production from rubber plants starts only
after 6 to 7 years. Compared to the gain and investment applied 3.92% disagreed on the
statement that ‘rubber can assure more financial return compared to the agriculture
land. 58.82% of the respondent strongly agreed that rubber crop can be an alternate
source of income, where 21.57%, 15.69% and 3.92% of respondent agree, stay neutral
and disagree respectively. As the demand of the rubber products is increasing day by
day 66.67% of the respondent believed as potentiality of expanding as commercial
plantation. As there are inadequate crop insurance practice in Nepal, few respondents
believed that rubber plantation can be considered as loan and potentiality to be covered
by insurance mechanism (Table 10).

30
 Table 11: Farmers perception about rubber plantation
No
Strongly Strongly
Agree Neutral Disagrees Respons
Agree Disagree
e
Increase productivity 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0
Reduces labour cost compared to 7.84%
82.35% 9.80% 0% 0% 0%
agriculture land
Assures more financial return 0%
54.90% 31.37% 9.80% 3.92% 0%
compared to agriculture land
Potentiality of being alternative 0%
58.82% 21.57% 15.69% 3.92% 0%
source of income
Potentiality of expanding as 0%
66.67% 17.65% 7.84% 7.84% 0%
commercial plantation
Likelihood of considering for 0%
25.49% 52.94% 21.57% 0% 0%
loan and financial support
Potentiality of covering under 0%
17.67% 54.94% 21.57% 3.92% 3.92%
insurance mechanism

Potentiality of covering under insurance mechanism

Likelihood of considering for loan and financial support

Potentiality of expanding as commercial plantation

Potentiality of being alternative source of income

Assures more financial return compared to agriculture
land
Reduces labour cost compared to agriculture land

Increase productivity

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

No Response Strongly Disagree Disagrees Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

Figure 3: Farmers perception about rubber plantation

3.2.2 Annual Income from rubber plantation

The price of the rubber varies according to the collector and the value chain actor’s
involvement. Generally, 1 Kg of Dry Rubber content can be sold in Rs 250(190 to 230) if
high quality latex is produced. The producers, cooperatives, traders, wholesalers and retailers
are the main actors of value chain. Moreover, there is not any institution to fix price or
controlling market fluctuation. Calculating the average price of rubber received by the
producers, it was found that around 31 % of the respondents do not have any income. This
group of respondents has either young rubber stands below 6 years or has not been contacted
by the traders. This suggests that a large group of people have just invested in rubber

31
plantation with zero income. Moreover, around 9% have income below Rs. 200,000 and
37.78% of the respondent has income between 200,000 and 500,000. Similarly, 22% of the
respondents have income above Rs 500,000 (Figure 4).

Income from rubber under different categories

Zero income Below 20000 200000-500000 Above 500000

Figure 4: Income from rubber plantation

3.2.3Local level authority perception

Three local level meetings were conducted in Mai Municipality, Kankai and Kachankabal
Rural municipality. The local government proposes no programs for rubber plantation.
It was found that local people have a misconception about the carbon dioxide and
oxygen relation of the rubber plants. Farmers believe that rubber plants release carbon
dioxide and consume oxygen. The chief of Kachankabal responded that farmers prefer
banana farming rather than rubber plantation. Lack of expertise especially in rubber
plantation, taping process and post harvesting techniques, lack of nursery for
productive plant production, and inability to identify suitable technology and
technicians are serious problems and challenges in rubber. Local level authorities
believed that policy to utilize marginal and barren land around river or inside
community forest should be promoted for production of cash crops like rubber, tea,
banana etc., based on soil condition and topography.

3.2.4Impacts on native vegetation

As the majority of the farmers is practicing monoculture system in the rubber

plantation. Being tap rooted system tree and daily movement in plantation area for latex
collection usually does not favour species mixture. However, in the early stages of
rubber plantation, usually up to 6 years, intercropping can be done. Being an exotic
species to Nepal, there is no study/research on the impacts of rubber plantation. All
respondents were unaware of the impacts on natural vegetation. Being a cash crop,
there is a tradeoff between rubber production and biodiversity. Following researches
identified different impacts on the environment of rubber cultivation in a different part
of the world.

32
 ● A study by Warren-Thomas et al (2019) on the relation between rubber yield
and biodiversity concluded that there is a modest benefit for birds and
butterflies in intensive- clonal rubber plantation in southern Thailand. Similarly,
small scale plantation inside forest or agriculture land creates small habitat
fragmentation by creating small edge and ecotone to faunal diversities.

● Roy, Saha and Roy (2014) concluded that rubber plantation is gaining credibility
to improve the health, especially of the bare land or denuded forest land or the
land degraded by shifting cultivation. But, unrestricted expansion of the
monoculture may pose a threat to the ecology of the state, especially regarding
the destruction of biodiversity especially in fragile mountain ecosystems.
Similarly, in 30 years period, a rubber tree sequestrates one metric to of carbon
which equals 30 metric tons in 30 years.

● Rubber plant being tap rooted system protects sheet and rill erosion and
promotes slop stabilization (Kox, 2000; phillip et al., 1996)

● Few studies eg. Guardiola-Clarmonte et al, (2008), Satheesan et al (1985),

Balagopalan (1995), Roy et al. (2014), concluded that rubber plantation can
create dryness by absorbing maximum soil water, contains less nitrogen and
carbon compared to natural forest and discourage ground vegetation one tap
root system fully develops.

3.3 Rubber Suitability Mapping

There are multiple initiatives from the government sector and private sector for the
promotion of rubber cultivation in Nepal. Discussion with rubber industries and other
stakeholders shows that there is a need for development in the market, processing
technologies and training and capacity building of farmers are essential. Discussion with
experts and key stakeholders following area was identified as suitable for rubber
plantation (Table 11).

Table 12: Area suitable for rubber plantation (participatory mapping)

Districts Area (ha) Types of land

Jhapa 8,000 except low land (water logged area)
Morang 4,900 Eastern part
Sunsari 2,000 River reclaim area
Ilam 1,500 Lower part of Ilam
Udayapur 1,000 Easter part
Saptari 500 Eastern part
Total 17,900
Source: Expert Consultation and MoALD Task Team Report (2075)

33
This study applied maxent model for mapping of potential area for rubber cultivation in
Terai and other selected districts. The maxent model predicted the potential sites for
rubber plantation with satisfactory statistical accuracy; the area under curve value is
0.986. the Jackknief test indicated that the variables with higher importance for habitat
suitability mapping were ‘Elevation’ and ‘Mean temperature of driest quarter’ (Figure 5).
These two environmental variables presented the higher gain to compare to the rest of others
and hence contained the most valuable information. Similarly, the results for the response of
the model to each variable showed consistent result with the internal Jackknife test (Figure
5).

Figure 5: The Jackknife test for evaluating the relative importance of environmental
variables for rubber plantation. (Note: “ASP” is aspect; “Bio14 is Precipitation of driest
period; “Bio15” is Precipitation seasonality; “Bio17” is Precipitation of driest quarter;
“Bio18” is Precipitation of warmest quarter; “Bio19” is Precipitation of coldest quarter;
“Bio2” is Mean diurnal range; “Bio3” is isothermality; “Bio9” is Mean temperature of driest
quarter;and “SLO” is slope.

The most highly contributing variables were Mean temperature of driest quarter (◦C)
(71.3%); Mean temperature of driest quarter(9.8%) and Slope (6.4%), whereas, other
remaining variables contributed less than 6% to the final model (Table 12).

Table 13: Environmental variables and their percentage contribution in Maxent

model for Rubber cultivation
Code Environmental Variables Percent Permutation
Contribution importance
Bio_9 Mean temperature of driest quarter (◦C) 50.4 85.8
Bio_18 Precipitation of warmest quarter (mm) 38.1 0.8
Topo_1 Slope (degree) 6.2 2.2
Bio_2 Mean diurnal range/ mean of monthly 3 5.8
max. and min. temp. (◦C)
Topo_2 Aspect (degree) 0.9 2.6
Bio_15 Precipitation seasonality 0.7 0

34
 Bio_3 Isothermality 0.6 1.9
Bio_17 Precipitation in driest quarter 0 0.9
Bio14 Precipitation of driest period (mm) 0 0
Bio19 Precipitation of coldest quarter (mm) 0 0

The maxent model shows that eastern Terai part especially Jhapa is most suitable for
rubber plantation and its suitability decreases in western part (Map 3). Best of the
occurrence point, the model result shows that more than 180 thousand ha. of the area is
highly potential for growing rubber in Nepal, which is located in Jhapa, Illam and
Morang (Table 14). Within these three districts Maxent model also more than 144
thousand ha are as low suitable and more than 88000 ha as moderately suitable area for
rubber plantation (Table 14 and Map 3). In addition, the low suitable area for rubber
plantation is also found in Sunsari, Udaypur, Saptari, Dang, Banke and Kanchanpur
districts as per the Maxent model (Table 14).

Table 14: Rubber cultivation suitability area in Nepal

Suitability (Potential) Area in Ha.
District Unsuitable Low (0.2- Moderate (0.4- High Total Area
(<0.2) 0.4) 0.6) (>0.6) (Ha)
Jhapa 51.08 830.92 16500.97 141215.88 158598.85
Ilam 119477.87 8732.73 11039.14 29379.90 168629.64
Morang 38775.44 68515.00 61144.87 13719.61 182154.93
Sunsari 56947.53 61407.16 0 0 118354.70
Udayapur 219127.56 1180.03 0 0 231307.58
Saptari 125789.06 1095.44 0 0 126884.50
Siraha 112467.57 0 0 0 112467.57
Dhanisha 117465.10 0 0 0 117465.10
Mahottari 99054.12 0 0 0 99054.12
Sarlahi 124979.64 0 0 0 124979.64
Rautahat 103425.56 0 0 0 103425.56
Bara 126572.43 0 0 0 126572.43
Parsa 138535.89 0 0 0 138535.89
Makwanpur 244368.19 0 0 0 244368.19
Chitwan 221918.27 0 0 0 221918.27
Tanahu 157372.85 0 0 0 157372.85
Gorkha 360062.94 0 0 0 360062.94
Nawalparasi East 142694.03 0 0 0 142694.03
Nawalparasi 71166.57 0 0 0 71166.57
West
Rupandehi 128988.58 0 0 0 128988.58
Kapilbastu 163778.06 0 0 0 163778.06
Dang 295046.09 2364.58 0 0 297410.67
Banke 184902.49 90.70 0 0 184993.19
Bardia 199202.15 0 0 0 199202.15
Kailali 328562.90 0 0 0 328562.90
Kanchanpur 157372.83 149.04 0 0 157521.87
Total 4038104.8 144365.6 88684.98 184315.39 4466470.78

35
 Map 3: Habitat Suitability mapping in selected districts

The maxent model shows that only one local levels of Banke (Map 4) and Kanchapur (Map
8) are suitable for rubber plantation with low suitability whereas in Dang district Lamahi and
Rajpur local level (Map 5) have low suitability for rubber cultivation. Moreover, it shows that
Jhapa (Map 7), Mornag (map 9), Sunsari (Map11) and Ilam (Map 6) have maximum number
of local level suitable for rubber plantation (Table 15).

Table 15: Rubber cultivation suitability area by local level

Description of rubber suitability
Name of Local Level High Moderate(0.4- Low Total
DISTRICT (0.6-1) 0.6) (0.2-0.4)
BANKE RaptiSonari 90.7 90.7
DANG Lamahi 102.19 102.19
DANG Rajpur 2262.4 2262.4
ILAM Chulachuli 5191.53 2319.51 987.11 8498.15
ILAM Deumai 69.09 110.05 596.99 776.13
ILAM Illam 2.95 400.36 971.96 1375.27
ILAM Mai 18011.69 4662.26 1865.31 24539.26
ILAM Mangsebung 3139.22 1565.58 2017.38 6722.18
ILAM Rong 2941.87 1910.43 2027.9 6880.2
ILAM Suryodaya 23.55 70.95 266.08 360.58
JHAPA Arjundhara 11061.66 6.8 11068.46
JHAPA Barhadashi 7770.32 321.27 8091.59
JHAPA Bhadrapur 9331.86 9331.86
JHAPA Birtamod 7883.05 7883.05
JHAPA Buddhashanti 7152.93 438.66 416.97 8008.56

36
JHAPA Damak 4588.61 2547.14 7135.75
JHAPA Gauradhaha 7840.92 7254.82 15095.74
JHAPA Gauriganj 7989.49 1675.38 9664.87
JHAPA Haldibari 9582.15 1919.52 320.76 11822.43
JHAPA Jhapa 9012.26 9012.26
JHAPA Kachankawal 9871.06 10.42 9881.48
JHAPA Kamal 8931.14 1600.38 10531.52
JHAPA Kankai 7898.39 69.41 7967.8
JHAPA Mechinagar 18339.48 20.13 40.2 18399.81
JHAPA Shivasataxi 13962.55 637.04 52.99 14652.58
KANCHANPUR Mahakali 149.04 149.04
MORANG Belbari 10342.56 3025.4 13367.96
MORANG Biratnagar 4120.45 4120.45
MORANG Budhiganga 5677.95 5677.95
MORANG Dhanpalthan 6780.78 6780.78
MORANG Gramthan 1881.27 5349.66 7230.93
MORANG Jahada 3900.47 3900.47
MORANG Kanepokhari 135.63 8017.22 132.68 8285.53
MORANG Katahari 5193.13 5193.13
MORANG Kerabari 314.43 7314.18 7628.61
MORANG Letang 2772.25 5191.74 3732.81 11696.8
MORANG Miklajung 3900.71 1876.27 1589.54 7366.52
MORANG Patahrishanishchare 2317.74 5697.75 8015.49
MORANG Rangeli 3564.31 7449.79 11014.1
MORANG Ratuwamai 217.65 11903.09 1744.97 13865.71
MORANG Sundarharaicha 3214.19 7874.15 11088.34
MORANG Sunwarshi 6004.22 4629.02 10633.24
MORANG Uralabari 4375.64 3137.82 7513.46
SAPTARI Saptakoshi 1095.44 1095.44
SUNSARI Barah 14414.24 14414.24
SUNSARI Barju 185.07 185.07
SUNSARI Bhokraha 872.06 872.06
SUNSARI Dharan 8933.57 8933.57
SUNSARI Duhabi 6712.53 6712.53
SUNSARI Gadhi 5355.54 5355.54
SUNSARI Inaruwa 5711.22 5711.22
SUNSARI Itahari 9437.95 9437.95
SUNSARI KoshiTappu WR 1459.17 1459.17
SUNSARI Ramdhuni 8325.8 8325.8
UDAYAPUR Belaka 10827.23 10827.23
UDAYAPUR Chaudandigadhi 1300.02 1300.02
UDAYAPUR Triyuga 52.78 52.78
184315.3 155365.5
Grand Total 88684.98 428365.95
9 8

37
Map 4: Habitat Suitability mapping of Banke district by local level

Map 5: Habitat Suitability mapping of Dang district by local level

38
Map 6: Habitat Suitability mapping of Illam district by local level

Map 7: Habitat Suitability mapping of Jhapa district by local level

39
Map 8: Habitat Suitability mapping of Kanchanpur district by local level

Map 9: Habitat Suitability mapping of Morang district by local level

40
Map 10: Habitat Suitability mapping of Saptari district by local level

Map 11: Habitat Suitability mapping of Sunsari district by local level

41
 Map 12: Habitat Suitability mapping of Sunsari district by local level

3.4 Financial Analysis

3.4.1 Financial Analysis of rubber cultivation

Financial analysis of the rubber plantation is conducted based on both field information
and literature review. The report assumes that land for rubber plantation is perfectly
good for growing conventional crops such as rice and maize. Amount of production,
spacing and extraction of latex per ha were not consistent for each subsequent year.
Yearly average latex yield per tree planted in the density of 771 tree per hectare
(around 12*12 ft spacing) in Nepal’s context is taken (MoALD, 2019). It was found that
latex yield was not constant each year ranging from 2.5 kg/tree to 1.1/kg per tree
(MOALD 2019, DoA, 2013) and depends on climatic condition. We estimate the percent
of latex yield after fifth year following Qi et al. (2015). We assume that although the total
latex production differs by climate, the percentage yields for each year in the 30 year-
life span of the rubber plant remains same for Nepal and China. The cost of timber Rs
15,000 per tree at the 30th year is considered (DoA, 2013). As existing rate of Nepalese’s
latex is around 290 per kg is considered for this analysis however, the cost can fluctuate
from 210-to 300 depending in quality of the product (Pandey et.al., 2020). Following
table shows the summary of the financial analysis of the rubber in NPR (based on Table
15).

42
Present Value of Total Cost Rs. 1806171
Present Value of Net Benefit Rs. 1736476
BCR 2.0
IRR 20.2%
Pay Back period (Years) 11 (Inter-cropping upto 6 year canpay back
period can be reduced)

43
Table 16: Cost benefit analysis of rubber plantation
Yea Cost Discount Factor Present of Value Yield/hactre (771 Benefit Stream @ Present Value Cash Present Value of Net
r Stream @10% Cost trees) Rs290/kg Benefit Flow Benefit
0 419461 1.000 419461 0.0 0 0 -419461 -419461
1 85015 0.909 77286 0.0 0 0 -85015 -77286
2 46291 0.826 38257 0.0 0 0 -46291 -38257
3 50785 0.751 38155 0.0 0 0 -50785 -38155
4 54513 0.683 37233 0.0 0 0 -54513 -37233
5 181492 0.621 112693 933.9 270821 168159 89329 55466
6 143434 0.564 80965 932.7 270470 152673 127036 71709
7 149162 0.513 76544 1059.8 307352 157720 158190 81177
8 155191 0.467 69585 1187.0 344234 160588 189043 91003
9 161538 0.424 65816 1356.6 393411 166845 231873 101028
10 168219 0.386 62280 1526.2 442587 170637 274369 108357
11 175251 0.350 58960 1780.5 516352 180978 341101 122019
12 182653 0.319 55840 1907.7 553234 176277 370581 120437
13 190445 0.290 52908 1950.1 565528 163813 375083 110905
14 198648 0.263 50150 1992.5 577822 152159 379175 102008
15 207282 0.239 47555 2034.9 590116 141269 382835 93714
16 216370 0.218 45111 2077.3 602410 131102 386041 85992
17 225936 0.198 42808 2077.3 602410 119184 376474 76376
18 236007 0.180 40637 2077.3 602410 108349 366404 67712
19 246607 0.164 38589 2077.3 602410 98499 355804 59910
20 257765 0.149 36657 2077.3 602410 89544 344646 52888
21 269510 0.135 34832 2077.3 602410 81404 332900 46572
22 281874 0.123 33108 2077.3 602410 74004 320537 40895
23 294888 0.112 31479 2077.3 602410 67276 307523 35797
24 308587 0.102 29939 2077.3 602410 61160 293823 31221
25 323007 0.092 28481 1950.1 565528 52196 242521 23715
26 338186 0.084 27102 1822.9 528646 44356 190460 17254
27 354164 0.076 25796 1695.7 491764 37511 137599 11715
28 370983 0.069 24559 1568.6 454881 31543 83898 6984
29 388687 0.063 23387 1441.4 11982999 755401 11594312 732015
1806171 3542647 1736476

44
3.4.2 Financial Analysis of conventional farming (rice & maize)

Financial analysis of the rice and maize farming in one hectare of land is based on Table 16& 17. At existing rate of NPR 25 for rice
harvesting 4300kg per hectare and NPR 23 for maize harvesting 3900 kg per hectare in Jhapa district (MoALD, 2020). Further, cost of
rice production in Jhapa is taken as Rs 50,901 per hectare and monetary value of rice straw from a hectare of rice-farm is assumed to be
Rs. 10,443; both figures are adopted from Subedi et.al. (2020). Due to lack of reliable data on cost of maize production, it is assumed to
be same as cost of rice production per hectare. Both rice and maize are taken as opportunity cost of planting rubber in Jhapa district as
farmers generally grow two crops in a year. Following table shows the summary of the financial analysis of the rubber in NPR (based on
Table 14).

Present Value of Total Cost Rs. 742636

Present Value of Total Return Rs. 21,53,176
Present Value of Net Benefit Rs. 11,15,772
BCR 2.03

Table 17: Cost benefit analysis of Rice farming

Labor Labor Cost at Total Cost Discount Present Benefit Present Present
Yea Fixed Productivity/hectar
Cost 5% increase per Stream/ Factor Value of Stream @ Value of Value of Net
r Cost e
(2020) annum hectare @10% Cost Rs25/kg Benefit Benefit
0 32292 18609 32292 50901 4300 1.000 50901 117943 117943 67042
1 32292 18609 33991 52601 4368 0.909 47819 119652 108775 60956
2 32292 18609 35780 54390 4438 0.826 44950 121389 100321 55371
3 32292 18609 37663 56273 4508 0.751 42279 123153 92526 50248
4 32292 18609 39646 58255 4580 0.683 39789 124945 85339 45550
5 32292 18609 41732 60342 4653 0.621 37467 126765 78711 41244
6 32292 18609 43929 62538 4727 0.564 35301 128615 72600 37299
7 32292 18609 46241 64850 4802 0.513 33278 130494 66964 33686
8 32292 18609 48674 67284 4878 0.467 31388 132403 61767 30378
9 32292 18609 51236 69846 4956 0.424 29621 134342 56974 27353
10 32292 18609 53933 72542 5035 0.386 27968 136312 52554 24586
11 32292 18609 56771 75381 5115 0.350 26421 138313 48478 22057
12 32292 18609 59759 78369 5196 0.319 24971 140346 44719 19748

45
13 32292 18609 62905 81514 5279 0.290 23612 142412 41252 17640
14 32292 18609 66215 84825 5363 0.263 22337 144510 38054 15717
15 32292 18609 69700 88310 5448 0.239 21141 146642 35105 13964
16 32292 18609 73369 91978 5535 0.218 20017 148807 32385 12368
17 32292 18609 77230 95840 5623 0.198 18961 151007 29876 10915
18 32292 18609 81295 99905 5712 0.180 17969 153242 27562 9593
19 32292 18609 85574 104183 5803 0.164 17035 155513 25428 8393
20 32292 18609 90078 108687 5895 0.149 16156 157819 23459 7303
21 32292 18609 94819 113428 5989 0.135 15328 160163 21643 6315
22 32292 18609 99809 118419 6084 0.123 14547 162543 19968 5421
23 32292 18609 105062 123672 6181 0.112 13811 164962 18423 4611
24 32292 18609 110592 129201 6279 0.102 13117 167418 16997 3880
25 32292 18609 116412 135022 6379 0.092 12462 169914 15682 3220
26 32292 18609 122539 141149 6480 0.084 11843 172450 14469 2626
27 32292 18609 128989 147598 6583 0.076 11258 175026 13351 2092
28 32292 18609 135778 154387 6688 0.069 10706 177643 12318 1613
29 32292 18609 142924 161533 6794 0.063 10183 180301 11366 1183
742636 1385008 642372

Table 18: Cost benefit analysis of Maize farming

Labor Labor Cost at 5% Discount Present Benefit Present
Yea Fixed Cost Prodcutivit Present Value
Cost increase per Factor Value of Stream @ Value of
r Cost Stream/hectare y of Net Benefit
(2020) annum @10% Cost Rs23/kg Benefit
0 32292 18609 32292 50901 3900 1.000 50901 89700 89700 38799
1 32292 18609 33991 52601 3931 0.909 47819 90418 82198 34379
2 32292 18609 35780 54390 3963 0.826 44950 91141 75323 30373
3 32292 18609 37663 56273 3994 0.751 42279 91870 69023 26745
4 32292 18609 39646 58255 4026 0.683 39789 92605 63250 23462
5 32292 18609 41732 60342 4059 0.621 37467 93346 57960 20493
6 32292 18609 43929 62538 4091 0.564 35301 94093 53113 17812
7 32292 18609 46241 64850 4124 0.513 33278 94845 48671 15392
8 32292 18609 48674 67284 4157 0.467 31388 95604 44600 13212
9 32292 18609 51236 69846 4190 0.424 29621 96369 40870 11248
10 32292 18609 53933 72542 4223 0.386 27968 97140 37452 9483
11 32292 18609 56771 75381 4257 0.350 26421 97917 34319 7899
12 32292 18609 59759 78369 4291 0.319 24971 98700 31449 6478

46
 13 32292 18609 62905 81514 4326 0.290 23612 99490 28819 5207
14 32292 18609 66215 84825 4360 0.263 22337 100286 26408 4071
15 32292 18609 69700 88310 4395 0.239 21141 101088 24200 3059
16 32292 18609 73369 91978 4430 0.218 20017 101897 22176 2159
17 32292 18609 77230 95840 4466 0.198 18961 102712 20321 1360
18 32292 18609 81295 99905 4501 0.180 17969 103534 18621 653
19 32292 18609 85574 104183 4537 0.164 17035 104362 17064 29
20 32292 18609 90078 108687 4574 0.149 16156 105197 15637 -519
21 32292 18609 94819 113428 4610 0.135 15328 106039 14329 -999
22 32292 18609 99809 118419 4647 0.123 14547 106887 13131 -1417
23 32292 18609 105062 123672 4684 0.112 13811 107742 12032 -1779
24 32292 18609 110592 129201 4722 0.102 13117 108604 11026 -2091
25 32292 18609 116412 135022 4760 0.092 12462 109473 10104 -2358
26 32292 18609 122539 141149 4798 0.084 11843 110348 9259 -2584
27 32292 18609 128989 147598 4836 0.076 11258 111231 8484 -2774
28 32292 18609 135778 154387 4875 0.069 10706 112121 7775 -2931
29 32292 18609 142924 161533 4914 0.063 10183 113018 7125 -3058
742636 994439 251803

3.4.3 Analysis of Opportunity cost

Break- even is achieved only on 11thyear and only after 21styear can rubber farming become profitable to conventional farming (if rice
and maize are planted in a single year). However, due to good price of timber obtained from rubber trees, the benefit of growing rubber
becomes increases on the 30th year. By 30th year of rubber plantation benefits cumulative benefits at discounted value reaches
Rs.1,986,006 compared to Rs. 1,115,772 for conventional crops (rice and maize). Although rubber cultivation provides farmers an
opportunity to improve their incomes, it is also a financial strain during the approximately 7 years before a new crop can be harvested.

47
 Benefit of Rubber and Conventional Crops
2,000,000

Present Value of Cumulative Net Benefit

1,500,000

1,000,000

500,000
(NRs)
0

(500,000)
Years after Plantation
(1,000,000)

Rice+Maiz: Cummulative NPV of Net Benefit

Figure 6: Benefit of rubber and convention crop

Table 19: Cost benefit analysis of Conventional crops (Rice+Maize ) vsrubber

Rice: Present Rice: Cumulative Maize: Present Maize: Cumulative Rubber: Cumulative
Yea Rice+Maiz: Cumulative
Value of Net Present Value of Net Value of Net Present Value of Net Present Value of Net
r NPV of Net Benefit
Benefit Benefit Benefit Benefit Benefit
0 67042 67042 38799 38799 105841 -419461
1 60956 127998 34379 73178 201176 -496747
2 55371 183369 30373 103551 286920 -535004
3 50248 233617 26745 130296 363913 -573159
4 45550 279167 23462 153757 432925 -610393
5 41244 320411 20493 174251 494662 -554927

48
 6 37299 357710 17812 192062 549772 -483218
7 33686 391395 15392 207455 598850 -402041
8 30378 421774 13212 220666 642440 -311039
9 27353 449126 11248 231915 681041 -210010
10 24586 473712 9483 241398 715111 -101654
11 22057 495770 7899 249297 745067 20365
12 19748 515518 6478 255775 771293 140802
13 17640 533158 5207 260982 794140 251707
14 15717 548875 4071 265054 813928 353716
15 13964 562839 3059 268113 830951 447430
16 12368 575206 2159 270271 845478 533422
17 10915 586121 1360 271631 857752 609798
18 9593 595714 653 272284 867998 677510
19 8393 604107 29 272313 876420 737420
20 7303 611410 -519 271794 883204 790308
21 6315 617725 -999 270796 888521 836880
22 5421 623146 -1417 269379 892525 877775
23 4611 627757 -1779 267600 895357 913572
24 3880 631637 -2091 265509 897146 944794
25 3220 634858 -2358 263151 898008 968508
26 2626 637484 -2584 260566 898050 985763
27 2092 639576 -2774 257792 897368 997477
28 1613 641189 -2931 254862 896050 1004461
29 1183 642372 -3058 251803 894175 1736476
642372 14629783 251803 6786299 21416083

49
3.5 Opportunity, challenges and constraints in rubber plantation in Nepal

Demand for natural rubber, mostly for the tyres industry and the establishment of new rubber
industries in Nepal, has driven the expansion of rubber plantations in eastern part of Nepal.
Since rubber is essential in everyone’s daily activities, there is both opportunities and
challenges for stakeholder/farmers.
● Due to favourableAgro-climatic condition for growing rubber in eastern part of
Nepal, it can be promoted for restoration of degraded soil (water logging does
not occur) will improve soil fertility, enhance micro-climatic condition and
carbon sequestration. Moreover, open land inside the forest and other marginal
lands can be used for rubber plantation if soil condition is favourable.

● According to rubber experts more than 50thousand products can be prepared

from natural rubber (Roy et al., 2014). As the eastern and Terai belt of Nepal are
experiencing human wildlife conflict throughout the year, rubber plantation can
be the solution for minimizing the damage. This will increase the farmer's annual
income and add to the greenery of bare environment.

● According to Central Bureau of Statistics (2018) the export of rubber and rubber
related goods was worth NRs.18,207,000 in 2018 while total imports of the same
year was worth NRs.8,307,815,000). Thus, Nepal suffered a trade deficit of
NRs.8,289,608,000 in the aforesaid year (Pandey et al., 2020). More than 15,000
hectares of marginal productivity areas and more than 10,000 hactare of fertile
land are potential for commercial rubber farming in Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari,
lower parts of Ilam districts and other Terai districts. As a high value -cash crop,
value-added enterprise and demanding domestic market, Nepal needs more than
12,000 metric ton of raw material and rubber related consumption if the rubber
industries are allowed to run full scale (MoALD, 2019). As there is an increase in
a number of rubber industry, there is scope of fulfilling this gap by expanding
rubber plantation in suitable areas.

● Though rubber gives huge income and, more precisely more benefit, it is
challenging to those farmers who do not have an alternative income sources for
the first 6 years of plantation. Farmers should have patience to invest
continuously unless they start taping. However, plantation of other cash crop like
ginger, lemon and the practice of keeping honey bee can be intermediate
products as well as additional products, from rubber plantation area.

● According to the farmers involved in rubber plantation, the price for rubber
sheet has decreased in recent years. This leads to the lack of dissemination of
market. The price of the rubber depends on the international market and low-
cost import from Vietnam also poses challenges to farmers.

50
 ● Natural factors like hailstones and wind also cause huge loss. Still there is no
provision of incentives from the government especially insuring rubber crop and
loan mechanism for rubber farmers is not in practice. Even though government
of Nepal initiated activities like declaration of rubber zone under PMAMP there is
no clear policy and action plan for promoting of rubber cultivation.

● Rubber sheets are susceptible to fungal attack, especially in the drying phase so
special care and attention is needed during the sheet preparation process (Dick,
2009). It was found that old and phase out technology (existing smoke house)
and lack of experts (rubber experts) are major hindrances for the quality
production. As rubber gives continue output for over 30 years, taper should be
well skilled to maintain the standard of the tree (not cutting cambium layer) but
lack of education and trainings is decreasing the productive age of rubber.

● It was found that the sense of awareness and the understanding of issues and
events is limited among farmers. The potential for the miss-reads; they mix
meaning of the connection which created the chaos and confusion that surround
an organization and farmers (MoALD, 2019).

● Reliable source of seedling (Budded Stumps) is still major constraints in

expansion of rubber plantation area as majority of farmers are compelled to
depend on Indian seeding for plantation. There is a nursery in Range dada that
cannot supply enough budded stump and expansion of these nursery can be an
opportunity for experts.

3.6 Effort and initiatives from different institution

Efforts and initiatives from both government and private sector were equally crucial in
rubber cultivation promotion in Nepal. With the establishment of Gorkhkali Rubber
Udhog and formulation of the task force with the co-ordination between the Ministry of
Agriculture and Gorakhali Rubber Udyog in 2050 B.S. government of Nepal formally
started rubber cultivation in Nepal. The rubber development committee was
established in the same year. The Indian team gave the highly optimistic note on the
promising potential of rubber cultivation in Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari and Illam of Nepal
(Khanal, 2003). Crop development division under Department of agriculture was given
the role for rubber upliftment in 2052 B.S. Following tables shows the brief timeline in
initiatives and efforts in rubber cultivation in Nepal.

51
Table 20: Historical timeline on Initiatives for rubber cultivation promotion in Nepal
Year
2035 BS 1970s Jaya P Dhakal Imported rubber seed/seedling in Sanischare, Jhapa but failed to
establish.
2046 BS Jaya P Dhakal again Imported rubber seed/seedling in Sanischare, Jhapa
2046 First rubber nursery establishment in Sanischare, Jhapa, Nepal (5,000 budded
stumps)
2047 B.S. Establishment of Gorakhkali rubber Industry first pilot project in Sanishare,
Jhapa, Nepal (plantation of 5 ha)
2050 First Feasibility study of rubber cultivation in Nepal in collaboration with
Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Forest and Gorkhkali Rubber
rubberIndustryi
2050 Establishment of Rubber Boardunder the Ministry of Forest and Soil
Conservation, Chairmanship of Mr. DamodarPsd Parajuli, Director General-
Department of Forest and Member Secretary- Tilak Bhandari from Gorakhkali
Rubber Udyog Ltd.
2050/51 Feasibility study on rubber cultivation and promotion in Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari
and Ilam by rubber expert from Nepal
2052 Department of Cottage and Small Industry initiated potential for special financial
program for small holders/ farmers engaged in rubber plantation in coordination
with district office of cottage and small industry, Jhapa.
2052 Establishment of crop development division under Department of A griculture
which also had responsibility for promoting rubber cultivation in Nepal
2054, Asad A letter has been written from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Department of
Agriculture to brief the Rubber Development Committee on the work done up to
that time as a focal point.
2057 Establishment of Crop Development Division as Crop Development Directorate
2061 Commencement of providing subsidy to rubber group farmers' cooperatives
2076 Establishment of “Institute of Rubber & Jatropha Research - Nepal “ by Non-
resident Nepali of USA.
2069, Bhadra Establishment of Natural Rubber Farmer Group
2071 Establishment of Natural Rubber rubber Agriculture Co-operative Ltd Buddhashanti-3
2073, Mangshir Act to amend and consolidate the law on industrial business.
2075, Shrawan Establishment of Crop Development and Agro-Biodiversity Conservation Center
by merging Crop Development Directorate and National Industrial Crop
Development Program. The responsibility of propagation of rubber crop has also
been given to this center.
2075, Poush In the presence of Hon'ble Minister, Hon'ble State Minister of and Secretary of
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development, a working paper on the
possibility and opportunity of rubber crop in Nepal was presented by Mr. Tilak
Bhandari, Non-Resident Nepali Association, Agriculture Promotion Committee.
Minister directs to form a task force to give suggestions for the promotion of
rubber crops
FY 2075/76 Establishemet of Rubber Zone rubber zone under PMAMP
2075 BS Rubber plantation feasibility study under the leadrship of sabnam Shiwakoti
(MoALD)
Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development, 2076

3.6.1 Initiatives from Government Sector under PMAMP

PMAMP has initiated its efforts by preparing a detail project report for a rubber
feasibility study. Study and research from the institutional level is being carried in
coordination with different universities of Nepal. Agriculture Minister handed PMAMP
with the responsibility to clarify the work responsibilities and jurisdiction of the
agriculture and forest sector in a policy manner to promote rubber crops. It is also

52
planning to facilitate agricultural credit, insurance subsidy like other crops for rubber
cultivation. Policy support to private sector interested in operating rubber industry
using raw materials produced in Nepal. Different capacity building programs were
conducted in the past fiscal year and had the plan to enhance farmer’s financial and
technical capabilities. Subordinate bodies to conduct programs for the promotion of
rubber crops. For accessing farmers with quality rolling and smoke machine, PMAMP
has managed financial support to the needy farmers.

3.6.2 Initiatives from Private sector

1. Green Tyre Factory:

Green Tyre Factory, located in katari of Morang was established in 2074 Bs. Though it
was established in 2074 B BS the market supply of the tyres started a year later.
Monthly 40 tons and yearly 1500 tons rubber is needed in the industry. Out of which
only 10% i.e. 150 tons rubber has been produced. Most of the raw material is imported
from Vietnam, Myanmar, India, Russia (synthetic), Singapore. However, for the trial
production, domestic natural rubber of Jhapa and Ilam are used in small scale. Because
of old and phase-out technology domestic rubber do not have good quality which
increases the labour cost. The discontinuity of Gorakhkali Rubber lead downfall of
rubber farmers. In order to make wise and sustainable use of rubber, the government
should make the industry registration process easier and impose impose import
restriction policies to promote domestic production.

2. Chilimkot Tea Factory

The Danabari and Shoktim block are the only sites of rubber plantation in Ilam district.
These are owned by Triveni group (Subash Sanghai) started rubber plantation since
2067 BS. The seedlings were imported from Meghalaya, India. The plantation site has
47537 trees. Those saplings were planted in the pit of 2*2 ft and spacing of 16*16 ft in
flat land whereas in sloppy land the spacing was 10*20 ft. Out of these trees, 14000
trees are mature to extract latex and give an annual income of about 50 lakhs.

3. Agroforestry Promotion Centre (AFPC), Rangedanda

AFPC is the only site that contributes in seedling production within the country. RRII
414, RRII 417, RRII 422, RRII429, RRII430, RRII105, GT1 and RRIM 600 are the rubber
varieties in practice. Before rubber plantation, the site was used for producing raw
materials needed for the preparation of pharmaceuticals, but there was no profit. In
2059BS, Failure of herbal NTFP cultivation, a non-palatable feature of rubber for
elephant and higher economic valuation leads to a rubber plantation in 85 Bigha. 40,000
individuals of rubber were planted, maintaining 14*14 ft spacing.

53
 4. Rubber and Jatropha Research Nepal/USA

Rubber and Jatropha Research Nepal/USA was established on October, 2010 in USA,
registered with Internal Revenue Service, USA as a 501 (C), 3 charitable non-profit
organization. This established institute is dedicated to environmental protection and
quality of life improvement of Nepali farmers. The team has diverse exports to “give
back” to our motherland technical expertise to utilize marginal natural resources and
help uplift the downtrodden. Currently, IRJR-Nepal has signed MoU and LoA with 9
different organizations of Nepal like Agriculture Forestry University (AFU), RECAST-
Tribhuvan University, Girija Prasad Koirala Foundation, National Innovation Center,
Agriculture Promotion Committee-NRNA, Agriculture Agro-enterprises Center-FNCCI,
Central Agriculture Herbal Co-operatives Ltd, Munaa Krishi Limited and pipeline of
MOU with Purbanchal University, Small Farmers Natural Rubber Producers
Association, Natural Rubber Agriculture Co-operative Ltd and World Star Rubber Farm
Company Pvt Ltd.

3.6.3 Other Initiatives

1. Girija Prasad Koirala Foundation:

GP Koirala Foundation is one of the institutions willing to promote rubber plantation.

To do so, the foundation has formed its district rubber gram committee. According to
the district president of Sunsari and Jhapa, the foundation is planning to plant 3,00,000
trees per year for at least three years. GP Koirala Institute of agriculture and forestry,
Gothgaun of Morang district, is also planning to setup a rubber plot for practical
exhibitions. Recently rubber cultivation methods and practices have also been added.

2. Community Forests plantation

Community forests are marking their valuable contribution in enhancing the status of
rubber plantation in Nepal. In Jhapa districts 4 community forests (Kalika, Adarsha
Namuna, Telpani and Jamunbari) have established rubber as alternative source of
income. Whereas in Morang only Hariyali CF have planted rubber in 2067 BS but no
income has been taken as they are unknown about the taping process and market.

3. Ratuwamai Plantation Project:

Ratuwamai Plantation Project has planted rubber in 5 ha land. The very land was
previously used for growing Eucalyptus which was then clear felled. In the beginning
phase of plantation, Verme-compost was used and a cleaning operation was operated.
However, Rubber plants have not shown satisfactory growth performance.

54
3.7 Strategic Options for promoting rubber cultivation in Nepal

Nepal is ranked 44th in rubber production in world (Bhandari, 2020) despite of having
limited government sector support. As the government of Nepal established and
declared a rubber zone under PMAMP for promoting rubber cultivation in Nepal. In
recent years initiatives from the various sector have been increased after inclusion of
Rubber crop in the agro-forestry policy. Based on consultation with a various expert,
rubber zones, farmers, private sector and review of different reports, especially from
Ministry of Agriculture and livestock development (2019), Department of Agriculture
(2013) following strategies were identified to promote rubber plantation in Nepal:

● As more than 20 thousand areas are potential for the cultivation of rubber in the
eastern part of Nepal, the government needs to have policy and budget for
promoting rubber cultivation in Nepal. Moreover, policy commitment from the
government sector is essential.

● The government of Nepal need to formulate a policy to utilize marginal and barren
land in rubber farm afforestation in Jhapa, Morang and the lower parts of Ilam.
Mechanism to lease land for large scale rubber plantation needs to be developed.
This will help an environment protection helps in carbon trading, reduce global
warming, and create job opportunities for local people.

● Rubber crop is already Agro-forestry policy, it means rubber research needs inter
cropping with banana, vegetables, pine-apple, medicinal plants, bee keeping etc.
Under the PMAMP model, rubber pocket and rubber block should be established in
Jhapa and lower parts of Ilam for demonstration and capacity building of farmers.

● Commercial rubber farming should start with collaboration for rubber industries,
Department of Agriculture, Department of Forest, Central and Province Government,
Local levels, IRJR-Nepal, FECOFUN, NRNA, Nepal Forest Co-operation, Department of
Plants Research, Department of Forest Research, Training Center, Co-operatives,
FNCCI etc. under Private Public Partnership model. Under PPP private sector
(institution working in research and cultivation of rubber) should lead in marketing
and research. Moreover, plantation in the cooperative model can reduce financial
strain of farmer for first seven years.

● One separate National rubber promotion unit should be established under the
Ministry of Agriculture, which would need a full phase institution/ committee to
promote rubber research and facilitate/advocate in policy formulation.
Representative can be from Ministry of Forest and Environment, Ministry of
Finance, Ministry of Industry, FNCCI, NAST, NRNA, from Province Government,
private sector, Academia, Industries and Farmers Association.

● Financial credit from the bank needs to be initiated with subsided interest.

55
● International collaboration is needed with the Association of Natural Rubber
Producing Countries (ANRPC), International Rubber Study Group (IRSG), Rubber
Research Institute for developing disciplinary enterprise, manpower.

● Scientific management cultivation practice is needed along with the formulation of

master plan for rubber cultivation in Nepal.

56
Chapter IV: Conclusion and Recommendations

4.1 Conclusions

Rubber plantation started in 2046 BS in Nepal. Gorakhkali rubber industry contributed

to encouraging farmers and entrepreneurs for rubber plantation. Till the date, 553 ha of
rubber plantation have been done in eastern Nepal. Nepali rubber just covers 10 % of
the total demand (Bhandari, 2020) where production varies according to soil condition.
The majority of the farmers are practicing mono-culture where intermixing with ginger,
turmeric was in limited area. Huge groups of farmers and entrepreneurs are involved in
rubber farming among them around 61% have land less than 1 ha. Private firms, public
lands, cooperatives and individual farmers are actively involved. Community forests are
also planting rubber as an alternative source of income for the user group. Most prefer
soil type for rubber plantation was found to be the sandy loam soil without
waterlogging. Respondents with income from rubber agreed on positive impact of
rubber in uplifting farmers standard and improving annual income.

The production of rubber per hectare is about 1348 kg where spacing for plantation
varies according to farmers. Fluctuating rate of rubber and cheap imports of rubber
from foreign country crates uncertainty in market. From the financial analysis, the
discounted cost was found to be NRs. 30,99,587, discounted returns NRs. 59,63,321and
present value of net return was found to be 2,863,734 per hectare in 30 years. Rubber
cultivation provides farmers have an opportunity to improve their incomes, it is also a
financial strain during the approximately 7 years before a new crop can be harvested.
So intercropping or mixed cropping can be introduced in initial years of rubber farming.

From the potential site mapping of rubber plantation, eastern Nepal was found to be the
best site. Based on maxent modeling, it was found that more than 180 thousand
hectares of land in eastern part of Nepal especially Jhapa is highly suitable for rubber
cultivation. The present status of rubber plantation indicates huge potential for rubber
plantation expansion in Eastern Nepal and we can probably decrease the dependency
on the Indian rubber market. Initiations have been taken from the government of Nepal
for enhancing the rubber farming in Nepal so PMAMP have introduced Rubber Zone and
focused on capacity building of rubber farmers. There is a need for multi-stakeholders
collaboration and leadership of both public and private sectors to promote rubber
plantation in Nepal.

4.2 Recommendations

At the moment, Nepali farmers are dependent on Indian supply for seeds and seedlings.
Proper training, field visit, rubber demonstration, and workshop should be emphasized
which will enable farmers to produce seeding. Due to old and turned out technology in
on-farm processing, Nepali rubber is facing difficulties to compete with the quality of
rubber imported from the foreign market so emphasis should be placed on processing

57
equipment and mechanization to increase the quality, in order to be competitive with
Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysian, Indonesian rubber etc.

It is an essential to conduct production cost reduction activities. Study on the impact of

rubber cultivation on the environment, biodiversity, etc., and economic analysis in every
stage of the value chain is required. Sensitivity analysis needs to be done considering
the various scenarios. Financial subsidiary mechanism should be developed along with
master plan to utilizer barren lands of Jhapa, Morang and the lower belt of Illam.

Although rubber crop is already in agro-forestry policy, no specific plans are developed
to promote rubber plantation. As demand for natural rubber continues to increase, it is
essential to develop policy to utilize barren land, marginal land along with high human-
elephant conflict area for biodiversity restoration and income generation.

We need further empirical research on the yield outcomes of inter‐planting non‐rubber

trees and maintaining understory vegetation. Further research is needed on inter
cropping rubber with banana, vegetables, pineapple, medicinal plants, bee keeping etc.
Under the PMAMP, rubber pocket and rubber block i.e. demonstration plot should be
established to create awareness and enhance knowledge on rubber.

Multi-stakeholder collaboration for production is essential to limit the trade deficit in

the rubber sector. Public Private Partnership model can be a viable option to encourage
rubber farmers. Moreover, capacity building training to farmers and knowledge center
with expertise on natural rubber cultivation is essential.

58
Reference

Babu, K. R. (1989). An economic evaluation of investment and resource use efficiency in rubber plantation
in Dakshina Kannada district. University of Agriculture Science, Bangalore, India.
Balagopalan, M, 1995. Changes in the distribution of organic carbon and different forms of nitrogen in
soils under natural forests and teak plantations. Proc. VII Kerala Science Congress, pp. 110-112.
Bhandari, T., 2020. Nepal Naturally East Naturally rubber: Development Venture. Institute of Rubber and
Jatropha Research- Nepal. www.irjr-n.org
Central Bureau of Statistics. (2018). Statistical Year Book. In Statistical Year Book (pp. 1– 90). Kathmandu,
Nepal.
Clermont-Dauphin, C. Suvannang, N., Hammecker, C., Cheylan, V., Pongwichin, P. and Do, F.C. (2013).
Unexpected absence of control of rubber tree growth by soil water shortage in dry sub-humid
climate. Agronomy for sustainable Development. DOI 10.1007/s13593-012-0129-2.
Coban, H.O., Orucu, O. and Arslan, E.S. (2020). Maxent Modelling for predicting the current and Future
Potential Geographic distribution of Quercus libani. Sustainability. 12, 2671.
Dick, J., (2009). Rubber Technilogy: Compounding and Testing Technilogy for performance. Materials
Science. DOI:10.3139/9783446439733.
DoA, (2013). Study on rubber plantation situation (in Nepali). Department of Agriculture.
Hariharbhawan, Kathandu.
DoC (2019). National Rubber Policy of India. Department of Commenrce, Ministry of Commerce and

FAOSTAT, (2012), http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home

Gourdiola-Claramonte, M., Torch P. A., Ziegler A. D., Giambelluca T. W., Vogler J. B. and Nullet M A.2008.
Local hydrological effects of introducing non native vegetation in a tropical catchment.
Ecohydrology Vol.1 pp 13-22
Hijmans, R. J., Cameron, S.E., Parra, J.L., Jones, P.G. and Jarvis. (2005). Very high-resolution interpolated
climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology: A Journal of the Royal
Meteorological Society. Wiley Online Library, 25(15), 1965:1978.
Khanal T, (2003). “Pakriti Rubber: KhetiTathaUdhyog Ek Abhiyaan” Harihar Bhawan, lalitpur, Jagdamba
Press Pvt Ltd.
Khanal, T. (2003). Natural Rubber. Kathmandu: Gorakhali Rubber Udyog Limited, Gorkha
Kox, H.L. 2000. Ecological advantages of NR latex production. Nature Rubber, 17(1) : 4.
Langenberger, G., Cadisch, G., Martin, k., Min, S. and Waibel, H. (2016). Rubber intercropping: A viable
Concept for the 21st Century? Agroforestry System. DOI 10.1007/s10457-016-9961-8
LRMP. 1986. Land System Report, Land Resource Mapping Project: Kenting Earth Science, Canada in State
of Tarai forest. Department of Forest Research and Survey.
Meti, S., Gohain, T., and Chaudhari, D. (2002). Response of Hevea to fertilizers in Nerthern West Bengal.
Indian Journal of Natural Rubber Research. 15(2): 119-128.
Min, S., Bai, J., Huang, J. and Waibel, H., (2019). Willingness of smallholder rubber farmers to participate
in ecosystem protection: Effects of household wealth and environmental awareness. Forest
Policy and Economics. 87 (2018) 70-84.
MoALD, (2019). Task team report on Rubber crop in Nepali. Ministry of Agriculture and livestock
development (2019). Singhadarabar, Kathmandu.
MoALD (2020) Statistical Information on Nepalese Agriculture 2018/2019.Agri Statistics Section, Monitoring, Evaluation
and Statistics Division. Singha Durbar, Kathmandu, Nepal: Ministry of Agricultural Development.
NeuNeuppane B., Budhathoki, S. and Khatiwads, B. (2018). Human-Wildlife Conflict and Mitigation
Measures in Jhapa District, Nepal. Journal of Forest and Livelihood. 16(1), 103:112.
Onthong, J. (2015). Effect of fertilizer and dolomite applications on growth. Songklanakarin Journal of
Science and Technology, 37(6): 643-650
Orimoloye, J.R., Ugwa, I.K. and Idoko, S.O., (2010). Soil Management Strategies for rubber cultivation in an
undulating topography of Northern Cross River State. Journal of Soil Science and Environmental
Management Vol. 1(2), pp. 034-039,
Pandey, S.R., Dhungana, S.M., and Sharma, G.P., (2020). Economics of production and marketing of natural
rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) in Jhapa, Nepal. Agriculture and Environmental Science 5(1): 25-32.
Philip, V., Rao, D.V.K.N., Varghese, M., Vinod, K, K., Pothen, J. and Krishnakumar, A.K. 1996. Spatial
distribution of roots and nutrients in soils under rubber plantations in Tripura. Indian Journal of
Natural Rubber Research, 9(2): 106- 111.
PMAMP. (2019). PMAMP. (pp 63). Rubber zone, Jhapa.

59
Poudel, M., Adhikari, P., Thapa, K., Dhungana, S.M., and Manandhar, R. (2020). Economics of Rubber
Production in Jhapa, Nepal. Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 3(1), 198-208. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3126/janr.v3i1.27173
Qi,D.. Zhou J &Xie, J. (2015) Optimizing Tapping-Tree Density of Rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) Plantations
in South China. Small-scale Forestry.DOI 10.1007/s11842-015-9308-8

Roy, M., Shah, S. and Roy, M., (2014). Ecological Impacts of Rubber Plantations: Tripura Perspective.
International Journal of Current Research Vol. 6, Issue, 11, pp.10334-10340.
Satheesan, K.V, Gururaja Rao, G and Sethuraj, M. Rand Raghavendra, A.S. 1984. Canopy photosynthesis in
rubber (Hevea Brasiliensis). Characteristics of leaves in relation to light intersection. In C.
Sybesma (ed) Advances in Photosynthesis Research. pp. 125-128.
S. Subedi et al. (2020) Profitability and Resource Use Efficiency of Rice Production in Jhapa District of
Nepal. International Journal of Social Sciences and Management 7(4): 242-247. DOI:
10.3126/ijssm.v7i4.32487
Testado, R.C., (2013). Establishment and Management of Rubber Plantation. Rubber Production Guide.
Department of Agriculture. USM, Kabacan, Cotabato.
Tiitrosemito, S., (1996). Weed Management on a Rubber Plantation with Special Reference to minimum
Tillage Cultivation. JIRCAS International Symposium Series No.4. 65-75.
Ugwa, I.k., Orimloye, J.R. and Esskhade, T.U. (2005). Nutrient Status of Some Soils Supporting Rubber
(HeVEaBrasiliensis) In midwestern Nigeria, NIGER AGRIC. J. 36, 169:176.
Warren-Thomas E., Nelson, L., Juthong, W., Bumrungri, S., Brattstorm, O., Stroesser, L., Chambon, B., Penot,
E., Tongkaemkaew, U., Ewards, D.P. Dolman, P.M. (2019). Rubber agroforestry in Thailand
provides some biodiversity benefits without reducing yields. Jaournal of Applied Ecology. 57: 17-
30.
Yogish, S.N. (2017). Economic Analysis of Rubber Plantation- A Case Study of Shivamogga District.
Proceedings of the Sixth Middle East Conference on Global Business, Economics, Finance and
Banking (ME17Dubai Conference) ISBN: 978-1-943579-18-1 Dubai - UAE. 6-8, October 2017. Paper
ID: D751

60
Annexes

Annex 1: Survey checklist and field forms

A. Checklist for Consultation with Divisional Forest Office

1. Date
2. Name of Division Location
3. Attendance
Name Position Contact Number

4. List of Location (local levels) growing rubber plantation

5. Types of land used for rubber plantation

6. Types of cropping practices for rubber cultivation

7. Plantation in community and private forest

8. Efforts and activities from DFO for rubber plantation

9. Observed impacts on native vegetation (if any)

10. Presence of Rubber seedling in DFO nursery

a. If yes: Number
b. If No, reason for not having rubber seedling
c.
11. Efforts required to promote rubber plantation / encourage farmers
Federal level Province level District Level Local level

12. Challenges and prospects in growing rubber planation in Terai districts

Prospect Challenges

B. Checklist for Consultation with Krishi Gyankendra

1. Date
2. Name of Kendra Location
3. Attendance
Name Position Contact Number

4. List of Location (local levels) growing rubber plantation

5. Area used for growing rubber plantation in selected district

6. Types of land used for rubber plantation

7. Types of farmers engage in rubber plantation

8. Types of cropping pattern

61
 9. Planation in community land and other land

10. Efforts from institution to encourage rubber industry and plantation

11. Prospect and challenges in growing rubber plantation

12. Mapping of potential sites (by districts) for rubber plantation

13. Identification of potential sites for case studies

13. Efforts required to promote rubber plantation / encourage farmers

Federal level Province level District Level Local level

14. Challenges and prospects in growing rubber plantation in Terai districts

Prospect Challenges

C. Checklist for Consultation with Local Level

1. Date
2. Name of local level Location
3. Attendance
Name Position Contact Number

4. Area used for of growing rubber plantation (potential map)- hamlet/wards

5. Types of land used for rubber plantation

6. Types of farmer engage in rubber plantation

7. Types of cropping practices for rubber cultivation

8. Mapping potential area for growing rubber plant

9. Plantation in community forest and other common land

10. Perception of farmers on rubber cultivation

a. Potentiality of expanding business
b. Potentiality of improving income status
c. Interest on rubber plantation

11. Efforts and activities from local level to encourage rubber industry and plantation

12. Prospect and challenges in growing rubber plantation

Prospect Challenges

13. Efforts required to promote rubber plantation / encourage farmers

Federal level Province level District Level Local level

62
D. Annex 2: Questionnaire for Household Survey

1. Date…………..
2. Address……………………..
3. Name of Respondent……………….
4. Age ……. (age of respondent should be more than 25)
5. Sex…..
6. Education ………..
7. Major occupation of HHS…………..
8. Total Annual Income…………
9. When did you start rubber plantation?...........
10. Source of seedling for plantation ……….
11. What was the methods for plantation?………………………
12. What kind of land preparation do you do for rubber plantation
Types of land preparation Months Remarks

13. How did you get to know about rubber plantation?

14. Annual Income from rubber plantation ………….

15. How much area is allocated for rubber plantation?

…………….. in ha/ropani/ana/bigha/other (specify)………

16. How many plants do you have in your farm? ……………

17. Which part of land / types of land is allocated for plantation

a. Reason for selecting particular area
Types of land Area (in Ha) Reason for Selection

18. Is their difference in production by land types (rank by land types)?

1……..
2…….
3…….
19. What are the reasons for having difference in production?

20. Which Species mixture by land use types are in practices

Types of land use………. Types of land use………. Types of land use……….
Name of species……… Name of species…… Name of species……

21. Production form One hectare of land ……/ annum

22. Source of seedling and methods of plantation
23. Cost and benefits for rubber plantation
Cost Amount/ Annum Benefits Amount/ Annum
Seed / seedling ……….
Land preparation …………
Weeding ………….
Thinning …………
Harvesting ……………
……………

63
 24. Is their potential to grow / expand rubber plantation in your own land?
a. If yes?
i. How much area
ii. Which area
iii. Why?
iv.
b. If No, why? ………………………
25. Is it possible to expand rubber plantation in your locality ?
a. Area /land types
26. Is there Opportunity of growing rubber plantation ? yes/ No
If yes, why? …………
If no why? ……….
27. What area major challenges associated with rubber plantation ?
…………………….
………………
28. Perception on rubber cultivation
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagrees Strongly
Agree Disagree
Increase productivity
Reduces labour cost compared to
agriculture land
Assures more financial return compared to
agriculture land
Potentiality of being alternative source of
income
Potentiality of expanding as commercial
plantation
Likelihood of considering for loan and
financial support
Potentiality of covering under insurance
mechanism

29. Efforts required to promote rubber plantation / encourage farmers

Federal level Province level District Level Local level

Thank You

64
Annex 2: Name of Participants in consultation meeting with DFO

Name of DFO Name of participants Location

Jhapa Rajan Rai Mechinagar Sub-Division Forest
Office
Morang Narendra Guragain, Dipak Pokhrel, Division Forest Office, Biratnagar
Parmeshowarpaswan, BijayPraja
Sunsari Dan Br. Shrestha, Subash Puri, Sishu Jha, Inaruwa, DFO, Sunsari
Ilam Sanjiv Dhakal, Janak Sapkota, Suraj Ilam, DFO
Niraula, Yam B Rumba

Annex 3: Name of Participants in Local level consultation

A. Consultation with local level authorities

Name of local level Consulted people remarks
Kachankabal RM AnjalAlam

Mai Municipality Dipak Thebe

Kankai Municipality Rajendra Pokharel

B. Consultation with Rubber Industry

Name of industry Name of person Contact detail
Green Tyre Factory Binit Singhania 9852025919
Kankai Rubber Induatry Balkrishna Sapkota 9842638434

65
Annex 4: Name list of Household surveyed

Name of Participant Address Remarks

1. Yogesh Bhattarai (kalika CF) BudhabareJhapa 9806024654
2. ShantiraamChimoriya Mechinagar 11, Lawandangi, 9852677107
Jhapa
3. Prakash Bastola Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa 9862614187
4. Sitaram Bastola Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa 9862678196
5. Rudra Prasad Dhakal Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa 9842624683
6. Himabastola Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa
7. Pankaj adhikari Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa 9816941120
8. Shyam rai Barhadashi, Jhapa 9818529872
9. Chandra Rai Barhadashi 6, Jhapa 9806000131
10. Amrit bantawa rai Barhadashi 6, Jhapa 9803678741
11. PT Bhutiya Rangedanda, Bhadrapur, Jhapa 9814001998
12. Narayan Dhakal Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa
13. Rajendra Pokharel Kankai, Jhapa 9852672638
14. Chandra Prasad Adhikari Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa 9843571587
15. KhagendraDhakal Arjundhara 9, Jhapa 9852671901
16. Bal Krishna Sapkota Kachankabal-3, Jhapa 9842638434
17. DilipGoshwami Birtamod 6, Jhapa 9852671920
18. DipendraBastola Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa
19. Punya khatiwada Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa
20. Surendra Bastola Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa
21. Om Prakash Bastola Budhashant -3 Jhapa
22. TikaramJugedu Baradashi-6 Jhapa 9805223754
23. Kaushila Devi regmi Arjundhara-9 Jhapa Arjundhara-9 Jhapa 9842066012
24. PremrajGiri Arjundhara
25. Gyan Pd subedi Barhadashi 6, Jhapa 9806000131
26. Sanjay Limbu Birtamod 10, Jhapa
27. Hari Bhakta Shrestha Barhadashi 6, Jhapa
28. Sher Bahadur Thapa Mechinagar 4, Jhapa 9825923325
29. Buddhiraj Neupane (GPFoundation, Jhapa) Damak 4 Jhapa 9852676396
30. Mina Devi Adhikari Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa 9842704534
31. KhyamSitaula Kankai Municipality
32. DinabandhuPokhrel BhadrapurJhapa 9852677123
33. Ishwori Pd. Timilsina Bhadrapur 4, Jhapa 9852672613
34. Til Narayan Rijal Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa 023555146
35. Ram Pd. Bastola Buddhashanti 3, Jhapa
36. Aaita Bahadur Rai Barhadashi 6, Jhapa 9807921829
37. Khom Thapa (Co-operative Group, Damak) Damak, Jhapa 9852676503

66
Annex 5: Participants in Focus Group Discussion

Location Name of participants Remarks

Divisional Forest Sanjiv Dhakal, Janak Sapkota, Suraj Niraula, Yam B Rumba
Office, Ilam
Hariyali community Jit Bahadur Khadka, Santa bahadur Tamang, Kalpana Tamang
forest, Morang
Rubber Zone, Jhapa ShantiramChimoriya, Balkrishna Sapkota, Yogesh Bhattarai
PMAMP Jhapa Rabindra Subedi, Ramesh Magar, Rabin Niraula 9852655970
9841307810
Buddhashanti-3, Rubber plantation inititiatior in Jhapa and farmerTilakBhadari,
Jhapa Maya devi Adhikari, Narayan Dhakal, Prakash Bastola
Cooperative Group, Khom Thapa, Chandrakala Dhakal, Dilip Bhandari
Damak, Jhapa
AKC, Ilam Toni Bardewa, Hemraj Panta, Rujan Khadka
AKC, Sunsari Yogendra Yadav, Jyoti Timilsina, Prabin Shrestha
Farmers Framers, Pt Bhutiya – 9814001998 and Raju Paudelpaudel 9805223754, technical
Rangedada, Jhapa Khom Thapa (Co-operative Group, Damak)- 852676503, Tilak aspect
Bandari, Dilip Goswami

67
Annex 6: GPS coordinate of Rubber plantation location

Northing Easting Name of local level (blocks)

264859 87540 Shaktim
26421 873922 Damak
26350 87575 Baradashi
26401 88429 Kalika
264316 873710 Morang
263911 875444 Jamunbari CF
26239 88016 Kechana
264050 880040 Arjundhara
264620 87534 Danabari
264150 88345 Buddhashanti
264013 88355 lwandangi, mechinagar
26448 88752 Baundangi

68
Annex 7: List of Private rubber firm

SN Name / Description
1 Antarsanstha bahu udesyakirshiudhyogpvt. Ltd
2 Shree bharatikirshi firm Pvt.ltd
3 Hansha rubber and Tea garden
4 Goshwamikirshi firm
5 Sai traders
6 Prabhat Nursery
7 R C Rubber kirshi firm
8 Sana kishanprakritik rubber utpadansangh
9 Ganga kirshiudhyog
10 Smriti nursery
11 Sudhfalraspvt.ltd
12 Girikirshi firm
13 Yogitarkirshi firm
14 Halesiti garden
15 Morang caning
16 World Star Rubber Company Pvt Ltd, New Baneshwor, Kathmandu 9851191378

69
Annex 8: Detail of Cost and benefit for opportunity cost analysisof rubber

Cost of Production of the Rubber Plant (in 1 ha)

S. N. Particulars Years
0 1 2 3 4 5
1 Fixed cost
Smoke house (per hac, 1 smoke house cost Rs 12
1.1 25000
lakhs and can cover 50 hac)
1.2 Rolling machine - handroller machine 4000
1.3 Irrigation setup 120000
1.4 Tapping equipment’s
Zebong Knife
Guzu Knife
Template
Cup
Cup Hanger 15,000
Spout
Head torch
Collection Buckets
Collection Drums
2 Variable Cost
2.1 Field preparation 4,800
2.2 Pit Digging 22000
2.3 Labour(Planting) 14,200
2.4 Drainage channel 25000
2.5 Planting materials 126750
2.6 Maintainence Cost 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000
2.7 Stacking 20625
2.6 Manuring
Organic Manure 8500 9500 5000 6000 5100 5500
Urea 3840 3840 3840 4080 4180 4340
Rock Phosphate 3840 3840 3840 3950 3950 3664
Muriate of Potash 3040 3040 3040 3315 3500 4000
Magnesite 1450 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
2.7 Labour cost(field activities+weeding) 60,000 55,000 21,300 22,600 25,000
2.8 Labour cost(tapping) 80,000
Labor cost total 2.7+2.8 60,000 55,000 21,300 22,600 25,000 80,000
60,000 57,895 23,601 26,360 30,693 103,388
2.9 Rubber coat 4,000
2.10
Insecticides/Pesticides/Fungicides 2,416 2,400 2,470 2,580 2,590 2,100
.
2.11 Chemical cost(Acid+PNP(optional)) 3,500
2.12 Dress(Raincoat+Boot+Glasses+Apron) 2,500
Total 419,461 85,015 46,291 50,785 54,513 181,492

Source: Field Survey, Rubber Bali, Materialize Studies Survey 2069, Department of
Agriculture, Nepal

70
Photos

Photo: Consultation with Mayor (Kachana

71