Non-timber Forest Product and its Impacts on Livelihood in the Middle Hill: A Case of Lamjung district, Nepal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lamjung is highly rich in its vast and valuable Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP) including different kinds of valuable medicinal and aromatic plants. Nepal is a mountainous country, where most of the people are depend on forest resources for their livelihood. Non-Timber Forest Product (NTFPs) plays a crucial role in the rural livelihood. NTFPs serve as a source for their primary health, nutrition, income generation, energy (fuel wood) and material for a social-cultural and religious ceremony. The research was carried out the specific objectives of identification availability NTFPs, Role of NTFP in local livelihood, prospects, and problems to develop NTFP in the study area. The study was carried out in Chiti, Jita and Taksar Village Development Committee (VDC) of Lamjung District. Primary data were collected through Focus Group Discussion, House Hold Survey, Key Informant Interview, use inventory sheet and direct field observation. Secondary data were collected from different DFO office, library, journals, published articles, reports, online reports etc. The quantitative data were analyzed by using appropriate statistical tools. The qualitative data were analyzed by descriptive measure and presented in forms of charts, figure and tables. There were 52 major NTFPs identified in the study area and all respondents have knowledge about NTFPs, but they are not involved to collect NTFP for commercial purpose. They use only household purposes such as firewood for energy, leaf litter for religious purpose, and wild food and fruits are used for domestic use. The main problems of the development of NTFPs people are gradually leaving use traditional knowledge about medicinal plants. Slowly they became dependent at modern product and most of the people are depending on remittance. NTFPs play a safety net role to assist communities in adverse situation such as crop failure under the current change in climate and variability. Most of the people have knowledge about value of NTFPs and traditional knowledge about medicinal herbs, but such a valuable knowledge regarding use value of NTFPs seems to be disappearing into the younger generations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".