Nepal - Second Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project : indigenous peoples development plan

Indigenous People's Plan for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (RWSS-II) Volume 11 of RWSS-11 Social Assessment Submitted to: U THE WORLD BANK by: Yogendra Bahadur Gurung SAMANATA Institute for Social and Gender Equality P.O. Box # 13205, Kathmandu Phone: 535597, 547250, Fax: 549755 E:mail - samanataci)wlink.com.np Jawalakhel, Ekantakuna, Patan 27.12.2002  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS On behalf of Samanata - Institute for Social and Gender Equality, I would like to thank the World Bank for commissioning this study to us. I would like to thank Yogendra Bahadur Gurung for his valuable work in preparing the Indigenous People's Plan for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (RWSS) II report. This report was prepared and analyzed based on the findings of the Social Assessment of the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project (RWSS) II First Phase Report. I would also like to thank Dr. Lynn Bennett, SDV Advisor and Tashi Tenzing, Senior Sanitary/Environmental Engineer of the World Bank for their valuable contribution and comments during the different stages of the production of the report. Finally, I would like to thank Shobha Basnet for providing full support and assistance through out the study period and James Shrestha for production of the report. Ava Darshan Shrestha, PhD Team Leader Social Development/Gender Consultant Samanata - Institute for Social and Gender Equality  ACRONYMS AYCM Arunodaya Youth Club Mahuwan BWUG Bajrabarahi Women's User Group CAP Community Action Plan DDCs District Development Committees DEPROSC Development Project Service Centre DFO District Forest Officer DO Development Objective EVREC Everest Research Centre FGD Focus Group Discussion HDI Human Development Index HHs Households HMG/N His Majesty's Government of Nepal HSE Health and Sanitation Education ICCR Implementation Phase Contract Completion Report IDA International Development Association IEC Information, Education, and Communication IP Indigenous People IP Plan Indigenous People's Plan IPDP Indigenous People's Development Plan IRDS Integrated Rural Development Society KAP Knowledge Attitude Practice Kll Key Informant Interview M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MIS Management Information System MOF Ministry of Finance MOLD Ministry of Local Development MOPPW/ MPPW Ministry of Physical Planning and Works MRMG Mountain Resources Management Group NEFEN Nepal Federation of Nationalities NESAC Nepal South Asia Centre NFE Non-Formal Education NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations NIWF National Indigenous Women's Federation NPC National Planning Commission NPC National Planning Commission OD World Bank's Operational Directive PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper RDS Rural Development Society RWSS-I Rural Water Supply and Sanitation, First Phase RWSS-II Rural Water Supply and Sanitation, Second Phase RWSS-FB Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board SARAR Self-esteem, Associated Strengths, Resourcefulness, Action Planning, and Responsibility (A Participatory Tool) SAs Support Agencies SAPPROS Support Activities for Poor Producers of Nepal SDC Swedish Development Cooperation SOs Support Organizations SOLVE Society for Local Volunteers TAC Technical Appraisal Committee TOR Terms of Reference TOT Training of Trainers VDCs Village Development Committees WUG Water Users Group BYC Bhimepokhara Youth Club VHP Village Health Promoter  Table of Contents 1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................1 2. LEGAL AND SOCIO-CULTURAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................2 3. STATUS OF IPS IN RWSS-1 ................................................................................6 4. POSSIBLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS, INDIGENOUS PEOPLE'S CONCERNS AND EXPECTATIONS ............... 10 4.1 Adverse Impacts on IPs ........................................... 10 Land acquisition ..........................................11 Social ......................................... 12 Cultural and Religious ......................................... 12 Cultural Heritage ......................................... 12 Language ......................................... 12 Economic ......................................... 13 4.2 IPs' Expectations ........................................... 13 Drinki ng Water Supply and Sanitation Schemes ......................................... 13 Associated Process and Activities ......................................... 13 4.3 IP Concerns and Issues ........................................... 14 "Demtiatnd-driven " or "Road-head centre driven "? ......................................... 14 Other Forms of Selection Bias ......................................... 15 Shortcomings in NGO Selection ......................................... 15 IP 's Less Aggressive Service Seeking Behaviour ......................................... 15 Lack of IP (and Dalit) Voice and Influence in WUGs ......................................... 15 5. POLICY ISSUES TO BE INCLUDED IN REVISED FB POLICIES AND PROCEDURES .................................. 16 5.1 Involve Qualified IP Organizations in RWSS-II and set IP-Responsive Criteria for the Selection of SOs and SAs .............................................16 5.2 Formulate IP Sensitive Fund Board Policies and Procedures ............................................ 16 General ........................................... 17 Community C.ontribution ............................................ 17 Partnership ........................................... 17 Training and Awareness Progratmime ........................................... 17 Land Acquisition anid Resettlement ........................................... 18 5.3 Modify Pre-Feasibility Intake Survey and Pre-Feasibility Site Appraisal Formats to Focus on Issues of IP and Dalit Inclusion ............................................ 18 6. SUMMARY OF CORE ELEMENTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE'S DEVELOPMENT PLAN ............................ 19 Strategic Guidelines ...................................................................... 19 ANNEX 1: PRINCIPLE OF LAND ACQUISITION AND RESETTLEMENT . .22 Rules of taking possession of land 22 Procedure.22 Sample Formats.23 ANNEX 2: INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY OF FUND BOARD .25 ANNEX 3: MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) OF IP PLAN .26 (a) Compliance monitoring ........................................... 26 (b) Community monitoring ........................................... 26 (c) Development monitoring ........................................... 26 (d) Impact Monitoring ........................................... 26 (e) Strategic Monitoring ........................................... 27 ANNEX 4: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MODIFICATION OF PRE-FEASIBILITY INTAKE SURVEY AND PRE-FEASIBILITY SITE APPRAISAL FORMS .28 (a) Pre-feasibility Intake Survey .28 (b) Social Mapping.29 (c) Pre-feasibility Site Appraisal .29 (d) Identification of Community Contribution to the RWSS-11 ........................................... 29  ANNEX 5: PEOPLE CONSULTED IN THE DISCUSSION .................................................................. 31 Fund Board .................................................................. 31 SOs and SAs ............................................................... 31 Makwanpur District ............................................................... 31 Bajrabarahi VDC .................................................................. 31 VDC ................................................................ 32 Nawalparasi District ............................................................... 32 ANNEX 6: CHECK LISTS FOR DISCUSSION IN SOCIAL ASSESSMENT STUDY ................................................... 33 Resettlement ............................................................... 33 Indigenous Peoples .................................................................. 33 Gender .................................................................. 33 Income Generation/micro-credit ................................................................ 33 Linkages to VDCs/DDCs and the Decentralization Process ............................................................... 34 REFERENCE CITED .................................................................. 35  Indigenous People's Plan Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (RWSS-II) 1. Background 1. Drinking water and sanitary facilities are among the basic needs for human development. They are also important indicators of the well being of a population in terms of health and quality of life. However, especially in rural Nepal, the availability of drinking water and sanitation, the way that these facilities provided by the state and awareness of people themselves about the health related aspects of these services, are all extremely poor. Even if the facilities exist, the quality of drinking water as well as the related health and sanitation services is very poor. This has been one of the main reasons why water born diseases remain at the top of the list as causes of morbidity and mortality. For instance, diarrhoea is reported to be the cause of almost half of the child deaths in Nepal. 2. To address this problem, the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board (RWSS-FB), was established in 1996 under the Ministry of Physical Planning and Works (MPPW) and has been implementing a demand-led, community-based rural water supply and sanitation (RWSS-1) project funded mainly by the International Development Association (IDA). The main aim of this project is to assist His Majesty's Government of Nepal (HMG/N) in delivering sustainable health and hygiene benefits to the rural population through improvements in the quality of rural water supply and sanitation services. The specific development objectives of RWSS-J are to raise the living standards in rural areas of Nepal by: (i) delivering sustainable health and hygiene benefits to the rural population through improvements in water supply and sanitation; (ii) improving rural real incomes by assisting women to identify ways to earn income from time saved in carrying water; and (iii) improving governmental and non-governmental capabilities to undertake and sustain these efforts. 3. RWSS-I is scheduled to close in March 2003 and HMGN has requested a follow-on project (RWSS-IJ) which is currently in preparation. The social assessment study for RWSS-IJ began with a review of the social development outcomes of the first project to learn from it's successes and failures in order to improve the positive social impact of RWSS-II. The Social Assessment exercise showed that, while the first project had considerable success in involving women community members, it had some weaknesses in terms of other dimensions of social inclusion - namely, caste and ethnicity. 4. Nepal is a highly diverse country with more that 65 distinct ethnic groups who have historically been organized by the incoming Indo-Aryan conquerors (who arrived over many centuries but consolidated their hold in 1768 with the conquest of Kathmandu Valley by Prithivi Narayan Shah) on the basis of the Hindu caste hierarchy. In the broadest sense, the incoming high caste Hindus took the topmost categories of the classic four Varna Hindu caste system (the priestly Brahmans and the Kshatriya warrior/rulers) and gave the middle rung (Vaisya-merchants and Shudra-peasants and labourers) to the indigenous, mostly Tibeto-burman groups in Nepal. These groups where classified in Nepal's version of the caste system as "Matwalis" or liquor drinkers in contrast to the Brahman's and Chetris/Kshatriya who were not permitted to drink alcohol. While in India similar indigenous groups 1  (called "Tribals" by the British colonials) were given untouchable status (from whom water cannot be taken), in Nepal, due perhaps to their numerical dominance and ability to fight, the indigenous groups were given middle level status and water was accepted from them. At the very bottom of the Nepali system were the Indo- Aryan service castes (Sarki cobblers, Damai tailor/musicians and Kami/blacksmiths) who also migrated in from India along with the high castes. They (and a few of the indigenous Newar castes) were designated at the "untouchables" (achute) from whom not even water could be taken (pani na chalne). 5. In Nepal's diverse but hierarchical society, past experience suggests that people's access to public goods (such as water and sanitation) differs significantly depending on their social identity (in terms of caste, ethnicity and gender) and on their economic status and location (urban/rural/remote rural). Because policies have often been insensitive to the social realities of Nepal, certain groups have been excluded from the mainstream health, education and water and sanitation services. The social assessment of RWSS-I revealed some degree of social exclusion based on caste and ethnicity and recommended that serious attention should be given to the poor Indigenous People (IP), Dalits, as well as women, to ensure their effective participation in RWSS-I1. For this purpose, RWSS-I1 restated the first development objective of RWSS-I to include a specific focus on social inclusion. This DO now reads: to deliver sustainable health and hygiene benefits to the rural population through providing more inclusive and sustainable access to improved water supply and sanitation facilities. 6. Because Indigenous Peoples (or Janajatis or "indigenous nationalities" as they prefer to call themselves) are found in high numbers in almost all of the districts covered by the project, RWSS-I1 has prepared a separate Indigenous People's Plan (IP Plan) in order to achieve its stated objective of social inclusion. 2. Legal and Socio-Cultural Framework 7. Nepal is a country of diverse culture, races and religions. There are two major racial groups found in Nepal: "Caucasoid" and "Mongoloid". Although there has been cultural and religious cross influence between these two groups, both cultural and religious systems of the two racial groups retain varying degrees of distinctness. Mongoloid groups (such as the Magar, Tamang, Kiranti, Gurung, etc.) tend to follow mostly Buddhism and animism, while most of the Caucasoid groups generally follow Hinduism and a few follow Jainism and Islam. Also, some small proportions of both Caucasoid and Mongoloid populations have adopted Christianity, plus some of the Kiranti peoples follow their own religion. 8. As noted above, Hindus have "vertical" (hierarchical) social structure based on the idea of ritual purity. At the apex of the system are the Brahmins or Bahuns and at the bottom are the Dalits1l whose ritual impurity rendered them "untouchable" to the high caste. So all Hindus are members of some Jat or caste group, whether low or high. In contrast, Mongoloid groups tend to have more horizontal social structures and are recognized as Indigenous Nationalities or Indigenous People (IP). Formerly these castes were collectively called the doms or sanojat (small castes), but currently those who have come into contact with critiques of the caste system and the caste politics of India, call themselves Dalits, literally "the oppressed". The term implicitly rejects the validity of the caste system and focuses on its inherent lack of social justice. 2  9. Considering Nepal's diversity of cultures, races, languages and religions, the 1990 constitution has recognized the existence of "tribes", even though the country has been still designated as a Hindu Religious Kingdom. The constitution has committed to the protection, preservation and promotion of language, religion and culture, affirmative action for IPs and vulnerable groups. It also makes the provision of education in mother tongues up to grade five. However, even after democracy, the elected governments have failed to pay much attention to the priorities and concerns of IPs in their policies, plans and programs. 10. Due to continuous political pressure from the IPs, the government set up the National Committee for Development of Nationalities in 1996. The committee recognized the existence of 61 Indigenous Nationalities in Nepal. Consequently, for the first time, the Ninth Plan (1997-2002) explicitly made policies and programs targeting IPs. The Parliament has passed a bill forming a Foundation for Development of Indigenous Nationalities, which has recognized 59 IPs in Nepal. In 1999, the Local Self-Governance Act was amended, giving more power and authority to local government bodies such as District Development Committees (DDCs), Municipalities and Village Development Committees (VDCs) - including the authority to protect, preserve and promote IPs' language, religion and culture. The National Planning Commission (NPC) has also included programs and strategies for IPs in the Tenth Plan/PRSP (2003-2008). 11. However, in practice, IPs have had limited ability to obtain access to and effectively use the legal system to defend their rights. This is because on the one hand, the machinery of the government is controlled primarily by "high caste" groups who have held power for the last 250 years and who do not necessarily want to change their behaviors, and on the other hand because many IP groups have had poor access to education, and are not aware of their legal rights. This situation can be seen from the data and discussion presented below. 12. Dominance in power structure on the basis of caste hierarchy was first codified in the Muluki Ain of 1853 and although discrimination on the basis of caste and ethnicity has been outlawed in the legal system, "high caste" dominance its accompanying ideology, continues in Nepal (Table 1). It is perhaps not surprising that all but 5 percent of the political elite who endorsed the original Muluki Ain were "high caste" Hindus. But it is somewhat surprising that nearly one and half century later that the pattern has changed so little. As Table I indicates, all but 8.8 per cent of the individuals occupying the top political, bureaucratic and executive positions in Nepal in the very modern era of 1999 are from among the same "high caste" Hindu group. IPs and Dalits have been continuously excluded from the governance arena.  Table 1: Composition of Governance Elites Social Group 1853" ________b N %N __ _ High Caste (Hill) 166 78.3 _763 __66.2 High Caste (Newar) 32 15.9 152 13.1 High Caste (Tarai) 2 0.9 138 11.9 Ethnics (IPs) 6 2.8 97 8.4 Dalit Caste I .82 0.3 Others (Caste unidentifiable) 6__ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _2 _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 8_ _ _ _ _ _ Total 212 100.0 1,158 100.0 Source: Adapted from Gurung (2002), Table 2. p. 3. Note: (a) Signatories of the Muluki Ain, Dec 22, 1853. (b) Neupane, 2000, Nepairna Jatiya Prasnia, p.82 (in Nepali,). 13. Political marginalization of JPs and Dalits based on social discrimination is the main reason why they are deprived of economic, educational, and the overall social well- being. The 1991 Census recorded that more than two-thirds of the total educated (with BA and above) are from "high caste" Hill Hindu population (Table 2) - within which Chhetris are relatively less educated compared to Brahman and Newar. Then, another 19 per cent of educated are also from the various Hindu castes group including those from the Tarai, but excluding Dalits. The share of IPs and Dalits is desperately low. Table 2: Graduate and Above, 1991 Caste/Ethnic Group- No. of Caste! ethnic Group Poyulation Graduated "High Caste" 3 68,024 70.2 Bahun 33,040 34.1 Newar 23,000 23.7 Chhetri 11,984 12.4 Other Hill Caste 2 2,400 2.5 Tarai Higher Caste 1 7 15,722 16.2 Ethnic (IPs) 6,057 6.2 Hill Ethnics 13 4,957 5.1 Tarai Ethnics 11I 1,100 1.1 Low Caste (Dalit) 3,034 3.1 Hill Dalits 5 2,790 2.9 Tarai Dalits 5 244 0.3 Others 1,744 1.8 Nepal 96,981 100.0 Source: Adapted fram Gurung (2002), Table 5, p. 6. Note: Based on 1991 census. 14. As with the distribution of collage educated population in the above table, so adult literacy and income are also associated positively with one's position on the social ladder (Table 3). The human development index (HDI), a composite index of education, health (life expectancy at birth), and income, is an indicator of overall well-being of the population. The HDI ranking in Nepal shows a similar close association with the caste hierarchy. On the basis of all three indices (adult literacy ratio, income index, and HDI), Brahmans, Newars, and Chhetris are well above the national average while IPs (excluding Newars), Dalits, and Muslims are below. Tarai castes have lower literacy and income than the national average; however, their HDI rank is higher than that of the IPs. 4  Table 3: Human Development Index, 1996 Social Group Adult Literacy Per Capita Income Index HDI HDI Rank ________________________ Rate (%) Income (Rs.)______ Caste Group Hill Bahun 58.0 9,921 0.237 0.441 1I Hill Chhetri 42.0 7,744 0.181 0.348 III Tarai Castes 27.5 6,911 0.160 0.313 IV Artisan Castes (Dalits) 23.8 4,940 _ 0.110 0.239 VII Language Group Newar 54.8 11!,953 0.289 0.457 1 Hill Ethnics (11Ps) Gurung, Limbu, 35.2 6,603 0.152 0.299 V M4agar, Rai, Sherpak Religious Group Muslim 22.1 6,336 0.145 0.239 VII Others 27.6 7,312 0.170 _0.295 VI INepal 1 36.7 [ 7,673 1 0.179 10.325 - Source: Adapted from Gurunig (2002), Table 6. p. 7. Note: Based on NESAC (1998). 15. Table 4 shows the poverty incidence for selected caste/ethnic groups giving the proportion of each population group falling below poverty line. The pattern of poverty incidence is similar to the pattern for income and HDI with few exceptions (Table 4). IPs and Dalits have higher proportions and Newar, Brahmans and Yadav have smaller proportions below the poverty line compared to the national average. The exceptions are that, in terms of incidence of poverty, Muslims are relatively better off compared to national average, whereas Chhetris are worse off and the Limbus have nearly three fourths of their community below the poverty line. Table 4: Incidence of Poverty, 1996 Social Group Proportion below Poverty Line ()Rank Caste Group Bahun 34 I Yadav 40 IV Chhetri 50 VII Sark] (Dalit) 65 xi Damai (Dalit) 67 XII Kami (Dalit) 68 XIII Language Group Newar __25 1 Religious Group Muslim __38 Ill Ethnics (IPs) Gurung 45 V Tharu 48 VI Rai 56 ViIl Magar 58 IX Tamang 59 N Limbu 71 XIV Others 3 7 Nepal 43 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Source. A dapted from Gurung (2002), Table 7, p. 8. Note: Based on NrESA C (1 998). 16. It is clear that IPs and Dalits have been historically marginalized both legally and politically on the basis the social and religious ideology which was codified in the 5  Muluki Ain of 1853. Despite its abolition in the legal code, this discrimination has continued even after the restoration of democracy with the introduction of the new constitution in 1991. Although overt public forms of discrimination may be less visible in interactions of the urban elite, IPs and Dalits continue to face economic, educational and social disadvantages at all levels of society - but especially among the poor in rural areas. 17. Looking at the intra-group situation, Chhetris and Tarai castes are relatively more marginalized within the "high caste" group and Limbus, Tamangs, and Magars are more marginalized within IPs. Moreover, it is likely that there are many IPs who were not identified as such by the census 1991 and so not included in the analysis. They are no doubt, among the more marginalized and vulnerable IPs - mainly the Chepang, Hayu, Jirel, and Lepcha of hill origin and almost all Tarai IPs. 3. Status of IPs in RWSS-I 18. RWSS-I was not designed to explicitly provide benefits to IPs and vulnerable groups such as Dalits. However, many IP groups and Dalits inhabit most of the districts covered by the program and the program covered many of the IP groups automatically. RWSS-IJ is making a number of design modifications to insure that IPs and Dalits as well as women in the communities where the project works are included in the design and management of the water supply and sanitation schemes and in other project benefits. To achieve the goal of equality of outreach in RWSS- II, it is necessary to understand the record of RWSS-I with respect to its outreach to excluded IPs and other excluded groups. Fortunately, the RWSS-I M&E system collected excellent data on the caste and ethnic composition of the population it covered. This section presents the outreach situation in districts covered by the first four batches of the RWSS program, based on the information available from Fund Board, and compares it with district and national level data on caste/ethnic groups provided by the 1991 census. 19. Data generated by Fund Board during RWSS-I period clearly shows that, of the total 59 IP groups identified by HMG/N, only 27 IP groups benefited from RWSS-I in the 49 districts where it operated (Table 5). There are 32 IP groups - generally groups with very small populations who may not have been present in the communities covered by the RWSS schemes - which have not been reached by the program. Speaking broadly, most of the IPs covered by the program in mountains and hills are those such as the Gurung, Magar, Tamang, etc. who (as groups) are much larger and relatively better off in terms of their average economic status, literacy, etc. than smaller groups such as Chepang, Hayu, Jirel, and Lepcha. 6  Table 5: Inclusion of IPs in RWSS-I IPs reached by RWSS-I IPs not reached by RWSS-1 MOUNTAIN_ 1. Bhote 1. Barha Gaunle 9. Mugali 2. Sherpa 2. Byansi 10. Tangbe 3. Thakali 3. Chairotan I11. Thudum 4. Dolpo 12. Tin Gaunle Thakali 5. Larke 13. Topkegola 6. Lhopa 14. Siyar 7. Lhomi (Singsawa) 15. Walung 8. M4arphali Thakali HILL 1. Bhu'el 8. Limbu 1. Bankaria 6. Kushbadia 2. Chepang (Praj'a) 9. Magar 2. Baramo 7. Kusunda 3. Dura 1 0. Newar 3. Chhantyal 8. Pahari 4. Gurung I11. Sunuwar 4. Fri 9. Surel 5. Hayu 12. Tamang (Lama) 5. Hyolmo 10. Yakkha 6. Jirel 13. Thami 7. Lepcha 14. Rai INNER TARAI I. Danuwar 3. Kumal 1. Bote 3. Raute 2. Darai 4. Majhi j 2. Raute TARAI _ I. Jhangad (Urau) 4. Raj'banshi (Koche) 1. Dhanuk (Raj'banshi) 3. Gangai 2. Kisan 5. Sattar (Santhal) 2. Dhimal 4. Tajpuriya 3. Meche_(Bodo) 6._Tharu ________________________ 20. Looking at the IPs coverage of the RWSS-1 by ecological regions is more meaningful because different IP groups are generally clustered in certain areas and ecological zones. As the majority of the IPs are of hill origin, the number of IPs reached by the project is also highest in the hill region. 21. The most revealing data are presented in Table 6. These data show the proportion of households by caste and ethnic group who were covered in the successive batches of RWSS I in relation to their proportional presence in 1) the districts where the project was active and 2) the national population. It should be noted that, since RWSS-1 is a demand-driven project, it does not "cover" any particular geographic area such as a VDC or District. Rather, it responds to requests from communities who have been organized and prepared to manage the water scheme by the Support Organizations (SOs) contracted by the board. It is very possible that the somewhat skewed coverage of different groups simply reflects the fact that some groups are much more able to "demand" services (and pay their share of the required matching costs) than others. Even with this caveat, the data do give an a true picture of which caste/ethnic groups 1) were chosen more frequently by the SOs to work with and 2) were more able to "voice" to their demand for water and sanitation services. 22. Some of the over and under-representation of certain ethnic, religious and caste groups may also be due to the fact that the concentration of a particular ethnic or caste group might be high in some districts and less or entirely absent in other districts (see map 1). For example, the program has covered only 43 out of 75 districts. Due the presence of other donors, RWSS-I did not engage at all in 1 the Far western Zone and only in a few Mid western hill districts, where the concentration of Dalits is high. Similarly, the concentration of Chhetris is also considerably higher 7  in those hill districts which were only partially covered, so the representation of Chhetri households served by the project in 43 districts is less by about 5 percentage points than the proportion of Chhetri's in the national population. Table 6: Percentage of Beneficiary Households (HHs) and Population and Total Population in 43 Program Districts by Caste/ethnicity Population' % of HIH by Batch b _ ____ Ratio Caste/Ethnic Group Nepal 43 dists. 11 III IV Average Col 9= _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~1(8) +- (3) ] (1) (2) (3) (5) -(6) (7) __(8) (9) Hill "High Caste" Brahmin 12.9 13.6 28.3 23.2 23.1 24.2 1.78 Chhetri 18.7 13.9 19.9 19.2 18.4 19.1 1.37 Sub-total 31.6 27.5 48.2 42.4 41.8 43.3 1.57 _ Madhesi 'High Caste" 11.0 1290.4 2.2 4.1 2.4 ___ 0.19 Indigenous Peoples Hills 27.2 29.7 34.7 35.4 33.2 34.6 1.16 Newars 5.6 6.7 4.5 7.4 4.5 5.9 0.88 Other IPs 21.6 23.0 30.2 28.0 28.7 28.7 1.25 Tarai 5.8 5.4 3.4 5.1 4.8 4.6 0.85 Mountains 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.50 Sub-total 33.8 35.9 38.2 41.0 38.4 39.6 __ 1.10 Dalits Hill Dalits 9.1 7.9 11.6 8.8 9.9 9.7 1.23 Madhesi Dalits 5.9 7.0 0.0 2.0 2.3 1.7 0.24 Sub-total 15.0 14.9 11.6 10.8 12.2 11.4 0.77 Muslims 3.5 3.8 0.3 0.7 1.2 _ 0.7 0.18 Others 5.1 5.2 1.3 3.0 2.6 2.5 0.48 Total % 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 100.0 100.0- N 3,292,266 2,608,710 28,822 ! 69,497 40,527 138,806 Source: Social Assessment Report, 2002. Note: (a) Distribution is based on 1991 Census,- and (b)Fund Board Data and caste/ethnic data not available for batch I. 8  Man 1: Man of Nepal Accordin2 to Different Langua2es LINGUISTIC MAP B. TnSEfO- URUMAN [3] Btw,t*tr [ii] Syans [J9J Ne wteri P - [%] t- ^ - rSSherpC3 ELIC-h4arsrFw [E?i atc-.Klrcnl +. - S us<ung i> I TnrsncJ Pnrl tN. EL] Jiref >iYj31rl l Thakall 1X Sunwow r}- _ _C r k ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ridbu CT42 Tharri F 7flJ Laepcln NE PALl r MQ 1271 Y4rO F( Macho rt'--,. y-- j2j RoAKjAi 9~~~~~~~~~- I + ..sO fgvx.eeT - M-v-s - \ hQAGAR GURUN- - - r> - An t ,,- >, ".- f^X\ -- : TAFPAAN ., uiicr'' I. Ott ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sf-WPPA' Am IND(S- AkYAN -l AWAD HI THARU J