Research Study Abstract

Title: Community Based Mediation Program in Nepal: Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation
Document Reference: researchstudy7.pdf

Executive Summary & Findings

Research: Community Based Mediation Program in Nepal: Framework for Monitoring and
Evaluation
Funding Partner: The Asia Foundation (TAF)

The Asia Foundation (TAF) has been active in several countries in supporting community
mediation (CM) program including Nepal. Experience has indicated that 'mediation', in
comparison to 'arbitration' and/or litigation, is more effective in providing just resolution of
disputes satisfactory to both the parties and is long lasting. It promotes harmonious relation in the
community and society.

The Pilot Phase (November 2002 to October 2004) conceived the program to be part of the local
governance system under the ongoing decentralization framework of the government. The project
was accordingly titled: "Dispute Resolution through Village Development Committees and
Municipalities". It was envisaged to work primarily with the Ministry of Local Development
(MLD) and with involvement of Ministry of Low, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs (MLJPA), the
Local Development Training Academy (LDTA) and partner NGOs. The goal of the program was
to improve access to justice at the local level through development and institutionalization of
mechanisms for alternate dispute resolution (ADR) in the VDCs and Municipalities. Accordingly,
the Pilot Phase aimed to establish enabling legal framework under LSGA 1999, to build
institutional capacity of VDC/Municipality for mediation.

The program was extended for one more year (2004/05) under USAID support for consolidation
and expansion to few more districts/ locations. Currently it is under a consolidation phase of two
years (2005-07) being implemented under financial support from The McConnell Foundation and
Save the Children.

The objective of this study is to restructure monitoring and evaluation framework for
community-based mediation program in Nepal. The basic tasks are to recommend improvements
and changes, where necessary, in the M&E methods and practices; and to generate new data and
analysis of specific qualitative aspects of the mediation process for more effective
implementation and improvement of the program in future.

1. To recommend improvements and changes, where necessary, in the M & E methods
   and practices; and
2. To generate new data and analysis of specific qualitative aspects of the mediation
   process for more effective implementation and improvement of the program in future.

1.3 Methodology
The study is based on a comprehensive review of the existing monitoring system of the CM
program as well as generation of impact related primary information from interviews of sample
disputants.
Review of Existing Monitoring System
Based on the program goal, objectives, outputs and activities a conceptual framework for
monitoring and evaluation is presented in Chapter 2. Existing monitoring system of the program
– information collection, processing, and reporting at all levels from project areas to the program

districts to the NGO partners in Kathmandu and to TAF – was assessed against the conceptual
framework. Gaps and areas of improvement were identified. The process involved:

review of basic program documents, studies, and secondary information.

interactions and discussions with responsible TAF staffs.

interactions with responsible officials of all NGO partners in Kathmandu.

detail review of the information collection, processing, and reporting system in the
project area, district, central office of the NGO partners and TAF; and

interactions with district coordinators (4), trainers (5), local coordinators (17),
mediators (42) and key informants (5) in 14 VDCs and 3 Municipalities of the four
purposively selected program districts (see Annex 2 for list of people contacted /
interviewed). Field surveys were undertaken for a total of 19 days during June / July
2006.
Sample Survey of Disputants
The need for collecting primary information relating to impact of the program through sample
survey of disputants was perceived in the initial stage of reviewing existing information
collection formats. The study, therefore, aimed at testing a suitable instrument for periodically
collecting requisite information from a representative sample of disputants through field surveys
and to analytically demonstrating the potential use of such information for impact assessment as
part of the overall M&E system of the program. It was decided to cover sufficiently large
number of disputants so that broad indicative conclusion could be derived on the effectiveness of
the program from the information generated.

Four districts – Dandeldhura, Kaski, Dhading and Sarlahi – were purposively selected. The
selection was based on several considerations such as: (i) areas covered by different partner
NGOs; (ii) districts representing east, central, and western region; (iii) districts representing Hill
and Terai; and (iv) districts where CM program has been implemented since its inception. Field
verifications relating to various issues of existing monitoring system were also undertaken in the
four districts.

Around 100 sample disputants, 25 from each of the four districts, was planned to be covered. It
was decided to interview only disputants whose cases have been resolved through CM at least
six-months before. This was necessary to assess the durability of resolution and because most
agreement between the disputing parties would take time to be fulfilled or terms of agreement to
be executed. The samples, however, were not randomly selected and the interviews could not
always be conducted at the disputant’s residence due to onset of rainy season, busy agriculture
season and time constraint. Nearby VDCs / Municipalities from the district headquarters were
visited and interviews were undertaken wherever the disputants could be contacted, e.g., the
farm, tea shop or VDC / local coordinator’s office. In some cases, local coordinators made
arrangement for disputants to meet at a pre-fixed location. Ideally interviews should have been
conducted without presence of any stakeholders, but it could not be strictly ensured since either a
mediator or local coordinator or both usually accompanied the team. Though interviews were
conducted privately, the knowledge that a stakeholder is present nearby could have introduced
positive bias in disputants’ response.

A total of 106 disputants were interviewed but responses of only 96 were included for analysis.
Response of 10 disputants was discarded since subsequent verification revealed their disputes to

have been resolved less than six months before. The questionnaire was simple and took about 15
minutes for administration.

Major Key Findings
 CM program has been very effective in resolving disputes. Ninety-six percent of the
disputants expressed satisfaction with the resolution and 95% responded that there was no
pressure exerted from anybody to agree on the resolution.
 The efficiency of CM resolution was also supported from existing information on disputes,
viz. 85% were resolved within a week of registration and 72% in a single sitting. agreed
provisions have been all fulfilled in majority of disputes resolved (83%) and partly fulfilled
in some (7%). Ninety-one percent expressed that the dispute is now fully settled.
 Positive response relating to improvement in relationship is slightly lower 71% responded
improved relationship, 23% reported no change meaning that relationship has remained the
same as before the dispute was resolved and 5% even mentioned that relationship has
worsened.

Policy Implications

Findings from this empirical study were presented at national policy roundtables and distributed to relevant ministries, parliamentary committees, and development partners to guide evidence-based policy making in Nepal.