Thompson 1

An Institutional Analysis of Glacial Floods and Disaster Risk Management in the Nepal Himalaya

Ian Thompson

Arizona State University, School of Sustainability

Thompson 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS:
1. ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 GLACIAL HAZARDS………………………………………………………………………………………………………...3
2.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS.………………………………………………………………………………………………….4
2.3 STUDY SITE…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5
3. THEORETICAL GAPS
3.1 SOCIAL PERCEPTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………6
3.2 HISTORICAL CASES……………………………………………………………………………………………………..6
3.3 EXTERNAL INSTITUTIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………8
3.4 INFORMAL AND LOCAL INSTITUTIONS………………………………………………………………………..8
3.5 COMMUNITY-BASED ADAPATATION…………………………………………………………………………10
4. METHODS
2.1 QUANTITATIVE……………………………………………………………………………………………………11
2.2 QUALITATIVE……………………………………………………………………………………………..……….11
5. RESULTS & DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………………………………………..15
6. CONCLUSIONS……………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………..…18
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….21

Thompson 3

1. Abstract
Institutional factors are rarely examined in disaster risks in the Himalayan region, as much of the focus
so far has been on improving the scientific understanding of the natural hazards and risks. This is
particularly true for glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs), which are natural hazards endemic to high
mountain ranges such as the Andes, Alps, and Himalayas. While these have put mountain communities
at risk for centuries, vulnerability is viewed to be increasing due to climate change. While the science
behind the causes and characteristics of these hazards is now better understood, there is an absence of
research understanding the social, cultural and institutional drivers behind creating effective strategies
to mitigate risks from GLOFs. This is more so for the Himalayan region, where institutions have recently
started to address this risk, but contention between local communities and external organizations can
hinder mitigation efforts. To better understand how people’s perception towards disaster risk, a study
conducted by Sherpa et al. (2019) examined the socio-economic and cultural perceptions surrounding
GLOF hazards. This research highlighted gaps in how scientific knowledge is disseminated to local
communities, and the resulting distrust in government mitigation projects such as lake lowering and
Early Warning Systems. A clear need developed to conduct an institutional analysis of the governance
systems responsible for disaster risk management and their interaction with local communities. This
study examines the institutional conditions under which mountain communities create effective
adaptation strategies to address climate induced hazards. We use a mixed-methods approach,
combining: a) quantitative analysis of household surveys collected in 2016-2017 and b) qualitative
analysis that maps out the various factors of institutions that influence the success of community-based
adaptation efforts. Additionally, GLOF case studies from Nepal are compared to those in Peru, where
institutions have a longer history of managing GLOF risks. The research finds that there are several
considerations including: lack of cross-scalar communication networks, lack of local knowledge and
participation in policy processes, and ineffective interorganizational coordination of knowledge sharing
and funding streams for local projects. This disconnect between external versus local and informal
institutions becomes an inherent issue in projects where agenda setting by external organizations plays
prevalent roles in project implementation.

2. Background
2.1 Glacial hazards
Glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) are natural hazards endemic to glaciated mountain ranges such as
the Andes, Alps, and Himalayas. While these have put communities at risk for centuries, vulnerability is
viewed to be increasing due to climate change. Increasing water volume in these glacial lakes from
glacial melt puts pressure on unstable moraines. This increases the susceptibility of flood events that can
be triggered by weakening of the moraine, avalanches and landslides, or earthquakes that can cause
moraine failure. Given the occurrence of such failure, the rapid onset of flooding can occur, posing
serious risk to safety of downstream communities, livelihoods, and public infrastructure. As climate
variability increases, the risk of these events becomes increasingly relevant in the lives of these
communities. The increasing stress from heavy rain events, rapid melting of glaciers and potential
landslides correlate with the increased occurrence of GLOF events.

Thompson 4
While communities of these regions are aware of the existence of these risks, they are also faced with
other substantial challenges of mountain life that contend with natural hazards. Verticality, a concept
championed by Rhoades (2007) describes how the diverse ecosystems created by the topographic
extremes have shaped the cultural development of the communities that occupy the land. The complex
development of zone-specific agricultural and pastoral patterns to take advantage of the ecological
diversity has also shaped trade systems between each zone to maximize the output of the land that has
shaped these thriving communities for centuries. Because of this, the land itself plays an integral role in
the identity of these communities, creating a strong sense of place for specific regions. Additionally,
because of the regional isolation of mountain communities, strong local institutions have formed to
manage mountain specific way of life and have developed hazard-specific adaptation strategies endemic
to the region (Stevens, 1996). The social systems that define the communities of Solukhumbu are
shaped by the cryospheric system in which they are located. Livelihoods such as agro-pastoralism and
tourism are dependent on the lakes that are also the sources of risk in question. This reveals the
complexity of disaster risk management as the problem is multi-scaler, from how individual
vulnerabilities shape response, towards how rules and institutions are put in place to build resilience
towards climate change and long-term hazard risk as a Social Ecological System (SES) (Rhoades, 2007).
A case study by Carey et al. (2012) analyzes adaptation efforts for Lake 513 in the Cordillera Blanca
range in Peru by using a socio-environmental framework. This study provided an in-depth look at SES
factors that either facilitated (technical capacity, visible hazards, institutional support, committed
individuals, international role) or impeded (perceived risks, imposed policies, institutional instability,
knowledge disparity, invisible hazards) attempted adaptation strategies for this specific glacial lake. This
analysis provides a valuable holistic approach for disaster risk reduction in glaciated mountain ranges
versus traditionally engineering-based analyses.
Watanabe et al. (2009) provides a useful look into the Imja Tsho lake in Nepal. The significance of this
specific lake is in its conflicting scientific findings over the past few decades regarding risk of GLOF
events. Previous studies of Imja Tsho have argued that this lake poses high risk to downstream
communities due to increasing water volume, creating potential for future GLOF hazards. This has
prioritized mitigation efforts around lake, including the integration of Early Warning Systems (EWS) into
several downstream communities. The Watanabe et al. (2009) study sought to show that previous
studies provided an incomplete scientific analysis of the risk for GLOF events, and new data collected
proved that previous risk analyses overplayed the risk of GLOF events and taking attention away from
potentially more dangerous hazards in other regions. However, other studies since Watanabe et al.
(2009) have shown that Imja Tsho still pose a significant risk to communities in question (forthcoming),
showing the ambiguous nature in accurately measuring GLOF risk.
2.2 Research questions
This research seeks to highlight the key institutional factors that influence adaptation strategies within
the Solukhumbu region. Guiding this are the following questions:
What are the institutional conditions under which mountain communities interact to create effective
adaptation strategies for climate induced hazards?
RQ 1.2 Who are the major actor groups influencing disaster risk reduction in the Khumbu
region?

Thompson 5
RQ 1.3 What are their development and objectives and priorities?
RQ 1.4 What are their funding streams, decision-making frameworks, and
knowledge dissemination pathways?
2.3 Study site
This research focuses on the
Sagarmatha National Park (SNP)
and Sagarmatha National Park
Buffer Zone (SNPBZ), also known
as the Mt. Everest region. This
covers approximately 1148 km2
and is defined by its rugged
landscape where elevation can
increase dramatically over a short
distance (DNPWC, 2006). This has
shaped both the cryospheric
ecosystem and the Sherpa people
that are the predominant ethnic
group within the park (Rhoades,
2007). Within SNPBZ there are 63
settlements and a population of
approximately 8,000 people.
Livelihoods are historically based
in agro-pastoralism, taking
advantage of the mountain
environment (Stevens, 1996).
Since since the creation of
Sagarmatha National Park in the
1950’s, livelihoods have been
transitioning to tourism which has
now become a dominant source of
income. However, agropastoralism also remains an
important source of livelihoods,
especially for marginalized groups
that may not have access to the
tourism industry (DNPWC, 2006).

Figure 1. Study Region (Sherpa et al., 2019).

Thompson 6
3. Theoretical foundations and gaps
To understand the current gaps in disaster risk institutions in Nepal, this work builds on concepts of
community-based disaster risk reduction (Shaw, 2013) and community-based resilience (Berkes & Ross,
2013). Concepts such as agency, self-organization, and local participation in policy provide a lens to
analyze institutional efforts and understand how social factors such livelihoods influence risk perception
in the Solukhumbu region by building on the work of Sherpa et al. (2019). Additionally, parallels are
drawn to instutional development in Peru which has faced similar barriers to developing effective
adaptation efforts that coincide with the social factors described above (Carey, 2010).

3.1 Social Perception
While the general risk of GLOFs is realized by Himalayan communities, the degree of risk is influenced by
several socio-economic factors. Understanding these factors is vital in understanding the various ways
the communities not only react to the risk emanating from GLOF events themselves, but also to
proposed adaptation strategies. Study by Sherpa et al. (2019) reveals how different factors such as
previous exposure to GLOF events, “cry wolf” effect from failed Early Warning Systems (EWS), and types
of livelihoods shape the perception of risks held by community members regarding GLOF hazards. This
concept is further supported in the literature by Dahal & Hagelman (2011), who provide the social
analysis on risk perception. The authors provide a qualitative analysis that highlighted several social
factors influencing how community members perceive the risk of GLOF events that are reported by
government officials and research institutions. Factors such as cognitive biases and heuristics were
shown to have substantial impacts on community perception of risk to GLOF events that often
contradicted the scientific reporting on the risk of certain sites (in this case Tsho Rolpa Lake). After
several evacuations, and absence of GLOF occurrence, the community began to distrust both the
mitigation measures put in place and the institutions behind risk monitoring. This shows the criticality of
social perception in adaptation strategies as communities lost their perceived risk of an event that is still
considered a high-risk site (Dahal & Hagelman, 2014).
This paper seeks to build on this foundation by positing that current institutional efforts are doing little
to incorporate these lessons into adaptation strategies. The case for this will be built in the following
sections, comparing several institutional cases in which the neglection of various social elements led to
failed efforts to minimize risk.

3.2 Historical cases
Regarding GLOF management, Peru has the longest history of institutional development that focused
specifically on reducing risk of GLOF events (Carey 2010). This development was triggered by the 1941
GLOF of Laguna Palcacocha that led to 5,000 deaths and the destruction of nearly one-third of the
provincial capitol, Huaraz. In response to this tragedy, the Government of Peru initiated the study of
glacial hazards through scientific inquiry and monitoring to better understand the threat at hand. Over
the next few decades, the approach to GLOF management continued to shift and transform. This
variability in management led to several different adaptation strategies that were implemented with
varying degrees of success.

Thompson 7
These failed implementation strategies are often the result of Peru’s hazard risk management failing to
recognize the importance of various socio-economic factors (Carey, 2010) . One of the largest barriers
was the process of data collection and dissemination over time regarding glacial lake studies. For several
decades, glacial studies were performed by international scientists who reported the results to the
national government in the Capitol, Lima. This process excluded the local at-risk residents, which led to
increasing fear and uncertainty regarding the lakes looming above them. This also added to historical
regional disparity between the capitol and the mountain communities that were seen as “backwaters”
(Carey 2010). Additionally, in partnership with many external interest groups in later decades, many
scientific studies of potential hazards were centered around generating hydroelectricity in the region. A
Andean communities perceived that this national agenda was for the development of infrastructure for
coastal regions, rather than the safety of its mountain communities. This mirrors the natural exploitation
of mountain regions seen in the Himalaya regions that will be discussed more in depth below (Rhoades,
2007).
This historical development of GLOF management in Peru reveals several key insights. First, the national
government created programs that were designed to reduce the vulnerability of mountain communities
to GLOF management. While they learned a lot through the science of glacial hazards, they
simultaneously deepened historical divides between communities and the national government. This is
largely due to a lack of recognition of various socio-economic drivers, such as economic class and
regional power dynamics that shaped GLOF risk perception. Second, this lack of transparency, added
with the lack of involvement of community leaders in the planning process led to social resistance to
attempted projects in several at-risk areas. Local buy-in was not established and there was no attempt
to incorporate indigenous knowledge into project designs. This could have streamlined prioritization of
mitigation projects based on community input, while simultaneously building trust with communities by
incorporating their concerns. Third, agenda setting played a public role in the prioritization of several
glacial development projects. A concrete case of this was under President Fujimori who promoted a
neo-liberalization of many public works projects in Peru. During this time, most glacial management
projects were turned over to ElectroPerú, who was a partner with American-based Duke Energy (Carey,
2010). During this time, several contested projects were initiated that aimed to increase water volume
for hydroelectric production of several lakes. Communities had petitioned to have several of these lakes
drained, and public resistance to these projects caused them to be shut down. While community voices
were heard in these instances, this added to the lasting distrust of government projects that have the
potential to last well into the future. There is much to learn from cases in Peru, due to socio-economic
similarities for both regions, however Nepal remains distinct in various elements. For instance, concepts
of Buddhist Dualism are used to explain events as both natural and supernatural (Bjønness, 1986). This
thought process will ultimately shape how mountain communities with strong Buddhist culture view risk
from GLOF events. Additionally, the structure of local decision-making processes regarding natural
resource management differ between Peru and Nepal. Nepalese mountain communities have a long
history of collective resource management through traditional systems based on the ideals of collective
action, and now more formal local institutions such as community user groups (Wakiyama, 2004).

3.3 External Institutions

Thompson 8
External institutions consist of government and other non-governmental institutions that articulate the
community’s voice concerning power relationships, responsibility and accountability. They operate at
multiple scales each operating based on organizational objectives and outputs that guide decisions in
GLOF related projects. In the case of Nepal, these institutions include the Government of Nepal, UNDP,
and several international cooperation, leading to the evolution of a complex institutional landscape to
reduce risk of GLOF events. While out of scope of this paper, it is important to note that the diversity of
institutions create multitude of agendas and priorities and drives a complex decision-making landscape.
This creates complications in ensuring effective policy-to-action efforts, funding, and communication
networks with local communities that are prioritized for reducing GLOF risk. While these challenges are
clearly articulated in adaptation policy document such as Local Adaptation Plan of Action (LAPA), there is
lack of transparency among the institutions (Byers et al. 2015). Within these cases, there are several
challenges for effective participatory approaches. One such challenge is for external institutions to
provide continuity in cross-scale communication and consistent funding mechanisms for proposed
adaptation strategies. For instance, communities often report infrequent reporting by research
organizations, and many projects remain unfunded or with no clear sources identified (Regmi & Star,
2014). Adding to this, many of the institutional partnerships happening at national and international
levels to create policy lack any form of knowledge dissemination at local levels. While the knowledge
generated form such efforts offers valuable information for creating policy, the absent of user input
makes it difficult to translate into action. Rajib Shaw (2012) highlights the importance of including
community input into policy efforts to foster local adaptation capacity and address disconnects between
decision-making at each scale. This emphasizes the importance of continuous community-input for
policy-making processes to ensure successful community-based disaster risk reduction.
In addition to policy-making and research institutions, there are several national and international Nongovernment Organizations and Civil Society Organizations involved in risk reduction in Nepal
(Bishwokarma et al., 2012). From 1997 to 2014, over forty thousand of these organizations were
registered in Nepal (Karkee & Comfort, 2016). They play a role in both sustainable development and
disaster relief benefitting from a more decentralized project management approach, compared to the
central government. Because of this, they are often lauded for being more representative of local
interests. NGOs also have drawbacks as they are often from outside of the local social and cultural
fabrics. They, often, operate independently of other organizations, creating wasteful overlap of certain
functions, and gaps in information dissemination (Bishwokarma et al. 2012).

3.4 Local & Informal institutions
Because of the verticality associated with mountain communities, they have a long history developing
effective local institutions and creating strategies fit for their circumstances (Rhoades 2007). For
example, the Khumbu valley developed the “shingo naua” system that was used to historically manage
common-pool resources such as forests in the region (Khatri-Chhetri, 1993). This self-organized system
operated under the community perception that it was beneficial to collectively manage forest resources
through communal efforts. This traditional management system operated based on localized knowledge
of the region and considered the nuances of the cultural composition of each involved community
(Agrawal 1996). Through this, communities were able to establish rules-in-use that dictated seasonal
harvesting of resources, as well as social-enforcement mechanisms and leadership hierarchies (Khatri-

Thompson 9
Chhetri, 1993). This reveals that social cohesiveness through trust was an essential driver of creating
effective localized management practices. With the establishment of SNP, community rights to collect
forest resources were stripped and communities were displaced, however. Two critical factors resulted
in this regime shift. First, mountain communities were treated as peripheral to political power, as
traditional management systems were displaced. Second, international influence over Nepal’s resource
management established an exploitative relationship between the national government and mountain
communities as development policy was established (Wakiyama, 2004).
With the realization that centralized management approaches were not effectively conserving forest
resources, the government transitioned back to a community-based management system by
implementing a community forestry program. While this was done in realization of the importance that
participation plays in effective management, it also ignored key social dynamics that have created
contention with communities. For instance, rather than taking advantage of traditional local institutions
(such as the “shingo naua”), the national government created community forest user groups in each
region under the District Forest Offices (DFOs). While it is notable that this was done in consideration of
equity in communities, these efforts were largely influenced by external agents. This created
disconnected institutions by ignoring existing social cohesion and creating a new power relationship
through the management of new institutional leadership (Wakiyama, 2004). Because of this, effective
institutional management across scales become convoluted, as the national agenda pushes participatory
planning considering competing interests at local levels (Wakiyama, 2004).

Another critical element of analyzing institutions within the case of Nepal is how community-based
disaster risk reduction will take place. Shaw (2012) highlights the need for the consideration of local
capacities and their roles in reducing localized risk in several cases throughout Asia. Some of the more
critical points mentioned include that strong local institutions are vital to create effective resource
governance regime at local level, and should be integrated into policies to ensure synergistic efforts.
Similar institutions architecture evolving specifically for Sagarmatha National Park.
Figure 2 shows the institutional framework
as within the Buffer Zone under the
Department of National Park and Wildlife
Conservation (DNPWC). Here, User Groups
(UG) manage resources through communitybased approaches with the Committee
representing community leadership in three
districts (Namche, Khumjung, Chaurikharka).
Another local institution is represented in
the Sagarmatha Pollution Control
Commission (SPCC), which is a bottom-up
management system for waste collection
Figure 2. Sagarmatha National Park Buffer Zone Institutions
(Adapted from (DNPWC, 2016))
and disposal within the Sagarmatha National
Park Buffer Zone (SNPBZ). With the addition
of both trekking and lodging associations, there is a diverse representation of local interests in which
communities have self-organized to manage decisions. This links back to the concept of verticality, in

Thompson 10
which the heterogenous SES conditions requires a diverse management strategy on a regional scale. This
is problematic when considering that adaptation strategies for regionally and culturally specific
challenges are originating from external institutions that are driven by disconnected political and
economic interests. This is especially relevant with concern to livelihoods, in which it is vital that
adaptation strategies recognize the importance of how they are shaped by the environment as well as
their impact on risk perception (Sherpa et al., 2019). While the events such as national regime shifts,
creation of Sagarmatha National Park, and growth of the tourism industry have changed the institutional
landscape, local institutions have remained integral to decision-making processes within the region.

3.5 community-based adaptation
The discussion above highlights the need for context-specific solutions to addressing community risk.
One such framework is the community-based disaster risk reduction (CBDRR) that outlines several
conditions for effective CBDRR (Shaw, 2012). One such condition is that local institutions (formal and
informal) play a critical role in maintaining community initiatives. Shaw also emphasizes the need for
local initiatives to be integrated into government policy to ensure scalability. Additionally, local change
agents play a critical role in implementation at local levels, backed by the compatibility with
development policy. The CBDRR process also outlines several factors such as awareness by planning,
vulnerability assessment, and risk management practices at local levels that lead to more sustainable
outcomes. An example of this type of effort briefly described above is through the LAPA process. The
LAPA is a participatory planning approach that seeks to develop community adaptation plans to reduce
risk to GLOF events and climate change. Byers et al. (2015) shows how this approach is being integrated
into both Peruvian and Nepalese institutions in partnership with the High Mountains Adaptation
Partnership (HiMAP). Through providing a “science-based, community driven approach” to building
adaptive capacity, LAPA seeks to address historical institutional asymmetries such as lack of
transparency that have led to community distrust to government adaptation strategies. While these
efforts vastly improve upon stakeholder engagement and integrating local knowledge, several factors
impede institutional capacity for implementing these projects at a larger scale. Peniston (2013) shows
that shortcomings such as regional scalability, effective coordination for infrastructure and funding
streams and interorganizational cooperation are all factors that will need to be addressed for LAPA to
have serious impacts on climate change adaptation and hazard risk management processes.
This paper also draws upon the works of Berkes and Ross (2013) who lay out several conditions for
building community resilience through the integration of ecology and psychology concepts. Through
this, community resilience is composed of agency and self-organization, with core concepts emerge such
as people-place connections, values and beliefs, knowledge, skills and learning, social networks,
engaged governance, community infrastructure, leadership and positive outlook. This complements the
finds of Sherpa et al. (2019), blending governance and perception. These factors therefore offer tools for
evaluating the efficacy of projects that are implemented by external institutions such as the
Government of Nepal and aid agencies.

4. Methods

Thompson 11

4.1 Quantitative
This research employs mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) approach to analyze the current
institutional landscape for disaster risk management in Nepal. In doing so, it add to the earlier research
by Sherpa et al. (2019), that focused on social perception in GLOF risk. During May-June of 2016, Sherpa
et al. (2019) collected 138 household surveys in the Khumbu and Pharak regions, within the SNPBZ. A
subset of questions that reflect perceptions on coping mechanisms and institutional roles have chosen
for this paper (see Appendix A). In order to explore the date, we first generated the descriptive statistics
for each question. To expand upon this, a logit model was used with GLOF risk perception as the
independent variable, and various sources of climate change information as the independent variable:
Y = β0 + β1x1 + β2x2 + …..
Additionally, Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis was conducted with GLOF risk
perception as the dependent variable, and the various institutional factors (based on questions in
Appendix A) as the independent variables. This provide predictor variables to show which factors
influence risk perception the most.
4.2 Qualitative
Qualitative analysis consisted of document analysis of reports by various organizations involved in GLOF
risk reduction. Key themes were identified as influencing adaptation strategy success and analyzed using
frameworks such as community-based disaster risk reduction (Shaw, 2013) and community-based
resilience (Berkes & Ross, 2013)
The following questions were used to guide the analysis:
•
•
•
•

Who are the major actor groups influencing disaster risk reduction in the Khumbu region?
What are their development and objectives and priorities?
What are their funding streams, decision-making frameworks, and knowledge dissemination
pathways?
What are the interorganizational connections across scales?

The information collected was then used to create an institutional map for involved organizations that
incorporates decision-making at different scales, information channels, and funding streams.

5. Results and Discussions
This analysis starts with seeking to answer the questions outlined for the household surveys conducted
by Sherpa et al. (2019). This provides indicators of how various institutional factors can provide
predictor variables in how community risk perception is influenced by sources of climate change
information, warning systems, and coping mechanisms. These results are expanded upon by outlining
gaps at different scales in the institutional landscape that shape adaptation strategies at the community
level.

Thompson 12
When inquired about coping responses, 54% of respondents reported that they did nothing in response
to flooding events. This indicates a lack of individual capacity to effectively mitigate risk and loss given
occurrences of floods. This lack of capacity correlates with the dissemination of climate change and
flood warning systems in place. Approximately 31% of respondents who have heard of climate change
received information from static sources such as radio, television, and newspaper outlets. This shows
the predominance of one-way information flows comparative to the 11.6% who’ve learned through
interaction with NGOs, government agencies, and training experiences, and the 13.8% who’ve received
information through the education system. A similar trend can be seen from the distribution of flood
information sources. The largest source of flood information is shown to be reactive, through sight and
sound (30.4%) to know that a flooding event is occurring, compared to 16.7% of respondents being
informed through Early Warning System sirens, and 19.6% through mobile device alerts. Figure 3
highlights the importance of warning systems, as those who identified no warning system had the
lowest (0.139) perception of risk.

Regarding perception of
responsibility for adaptation
strategies, most respondents
indicated that the government
should be responsible for both
leading and funding projects. For
instance, 63% of respondents
perceived that government officials
should be leading projects
concerning GLOF hazards, and
similarly, 66.7% indicated that the
government should be responsible
for project funding, and 5.1%
indicated that international agencies
should play a role in this process.
While the perceived responsibility
relies on the government, there is
also evidence of social restrictions
for favored intervention strategies.
While hazard zone planning is often
considered a favorable approach
Figure 3. Classification and Regression Tree Analysis – Risk Perception
from a governmental standpoint
(Carey, 2010), livelihoods and
geographic preference can highlight strong aversion towards potentially effective strategies. For
instance, when asked whether respondents would be willing to move their business to a different
location, 71.7% answered no. This shows both the importance that livelihoods play regarding risk
perception and the expectations put on government agencies to provide effective strategies within the
social structure of at-risk communities.

Thompson 13
Further complicating the nexus of government onus and livelihood influence is in the parallel between
increased risk perception and livelihood generation. The top three natural threats stated by respondents
were water, scarcity, flooding, and blizzards. The major barriers to tourism are stated to be physical:
infrastructure, transportation, and difficult terrain (38%), and other reasons such as bad weather,
earthquakes, and lack of awareness. Many of these barriers also overlap with disaster risk response
which is especially challenging in remote mountain regions as described above. This reiterates that there
are multiple SES challenges presented to mountain communities. Additionally, external institutions are
faced with the burden of providing effective management strategies to isolated communities in often
harsh environments. This also shows that there is potential overlapping interests between local and
external institutions through the recognition of development areas such as transportation and public
infrastructure.
5.1 Institutional Mapping

Figure 4. Institutional Map for Disaster Risk Management in Nepal.
Dotted lines represent current documented flows of information. Dotted lines represent financial flows,
indicating a top-down funding pathway from international agencies to local levels for LAPA plans.

Thompson 14
Evaluating the institutional landscape visualized in Figure 4, it is clear there is a complex interaction of
stakeholders involved in disaster risk reduction in Sagarmatha National Park. The main points of
evaluation for this study are:
•

Information Flows: This shows that most of information stays within the realm of the
international and national scales, with some information being extracted from the regional level.
Significant data collection goes towards generating reports and publication on issues such as
governance, vulnerability, and disaster reduction mechanisms. This data is used to influence
policy-makers at the national level in order to strengthen the science -policy collaborations such
as those seen in ICIMOD’s HIMAP knowledge platform that covers the Hindu Kush Himalaya
region. This is backed by the respondents of the household surveys, where 31% answered that
information regarding climate change was from static sources such as newspaper, television, and
radio broadcasts. This is supported through the logit model, which showed information originating
from NGOs and training have a higher correlation coefficent (.242, .286) of positively influencing
risk perception than more static forms (.012, .076) such as newspaper, or tv/radio. Therefore, a
more interactive flow of information between external and local institutions can play a significant
role in influencing how communities are perceiving GLOF risk. Additionally, flood warning remains
predominately reactive as 30.4% of participants rely on witnessing through sight and sound to
know when flooding events are occurring. With only 16.7% relying on sirens, and 2.2% from radio,
it shows that information dissemination between institutional scales remains largely
disconnected. Supporting this, the CART analysis showed that when respondents identified no
sources of warning, they also had almost no perception of risk involved (coefficient: 0.139) versus
having some form of warning system. With 26.1% of respondents identifying no warning system, it
is critical that a more established communication networks are maintained. It is also important to
note that women were shown to have less access to different forms of information on climate
change, which corresponds with lower risk perception compared to men. As Nepal continues to
move towards more localized approaches, it is a promising sign knowledge dissemination will
continue to increase. However as will be discussed in the LAPA case study below (Figure 6), there
are clear disconnects between knowledge flow and adaptation actions.

•

Funding Streams: Most funding mechanisms originate from international organizations and are
dispersed to the national government, and then disseminated through government agencies
(UNDP, 2014). While NGOs can offer a more decentralized network for the distribution of program
funds, inconsistencies in project funding remain a key barrier to implementing risk reduction
projects (Regmi & Star, 2014). Peniston et al. (2013) for instance cites several occasions in which
LAPA projects never extend past planning periods from a lack of established funding sources.
Additionally, due to the reliance of NGOs that are external to communities at risk, funded
initiatives are not guaranteed to represent locally-voiced concerns (Bishwokarma et al., 2012).
Therefore, while there are local planning processes taking place that identify responsible funding
parties (such as the DNPWC, among others) there is a delay in funding dispersal as they
disseminate from international and national levels. Coordination of funds from independent
sources will play a key role in creating more effective action and reducing project delays that are
currently inherent. Figure 4 highlights this, as most adaptation funding comes from large-scale

Thompson 15
international organizations such as the UDNP and GEF who disperse funding through the Least
Developed Country fund(LDCF). Through this, Nepal’s NAPA is funded and money flows down
towards individual LAPA projects. However, Regmi & Star (2014) point out that dispersed LAPA
funds often fall well short of the necessary amount for successful implementation.
•

Decision-making: The majority of disaster response plan is guided by the vision of national and
global institutions. For example, the UNDP’s Sendai Disaster Framework 2015-2030, USAID’s
Resilient Development Framework, Nepal’s National Adaptation Programme of Action continue to
be a major driver of local actions. While each framework highlights stakeholder participation, the
process is initiated with organizational objectives already outlined by the frameworks being used.
Because of this, the planning process that shapes the overall risk reduction arena remains in the
hands of external institutions. Therefore, while prioritization is often dictated by local institutions,
the knowledge received and mechanisms for implementation are all dictated through external
institutional guidelines. Additionally, NGOs above can create conflicts in creating long-term
sustainable decision-making processes surrounding disaster risk reduction. For instance, several
cases were reported by Rounce et al. (2016) in which government participation in program
management decreased due to the presence of NGO projects. Combined with the
misrepresentation of local voices in mountain communities, it is shown that NGO involvement is
not guaranteed to increase local participation in decision-making processes.
5.2 Agenda Setting

To carry out international agendas for climate change adaptation, the United Nations Climate Change
Commission and GEF group operate the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF). This fund prioritizes the
development of NAPAs for developing countries by these international agencies who guide prioritization
and provide financial funding for its implementation and is highlighted in Figure 4 (UNDP, 2014).
Through this, prioritization often originates from international institutions whose priorities are on
national scales, rather than localized initiatives that promote community-based adaptation measures.
Shaw (2012) highlights the need for the consideration of local capacities and their roles in reducing
localized risk in several cases throughout Asia. Some of the more critical points mentioned are that
strong local institutions are vital to maintain localized efforts, and that these institutions should be
integrated into policies to ensure synergistic efforts.
While Nepal’s NAPA is a national policy, it sets the structure of its more localized LAPA process. Within
this, influences of external priorities are witnessed such as the High Mountain Adaption Partnership
initiative that was a partnership between USAID and the national government. During this initiative,
USAID proposed changes to the LAPA process to better fit its own Resilient Development Framework
(Byers et al., 2015). Therefore, although the project is framed as “community-driven, science-based”
approach to adaptation, there are also clear indications of prioritization for project outcomes to fit
within international development objectives. Additionally, although Nepal’s government has initiated
several LAPA projects throughout the country, the rate of objective implementation remains low due to
disjointed organizational funding and regional organizational capacity Regmi & Star, 2014).
Cases of agenda setting as highlighted above can have long term impacts on adaptation planning efforts.
Community trust in institutions plays a significant role in creating effective GLOF mitigation measures

Thompson 16
(Carey, et al., 2015). This can be seen in cases in Peru and Nepal in which institutional insensitivity
towards community values and priorities caused social resistance towards well-intentioned mitigation
strategies (Dahal & Hagelman, 2014). Because of this, traditional and informal institutions should be
valued in creating community-based adaptation approaches that are more adept at dealing with
regional nuances in geography and culture that shape people’s perception towards GLOF risk.

5.3 Institutional Disconnect
As shown above, there are several key barriers for institutions at different scales to address and reduce
risk for GLOF events in the Solukhumbu region. One of the most significant barriers is the misalignment
of local and external institutional capacities and agendas. This is clear through the various transition’s
scene through Nepal’s natural resource management history. Figure 5 shows how different factors
govern within the risk reduction area. National policy promotes increasingly decentralized approaches
to handling risk of GLOF events, yet they rarely interact with the indigenous institutions actively
managing disaster response measures (Agrawal & Gibbson, 2001). The disconnect between indigenous
and national institutions can lead to further conflict between stakeholders, where programs designed to
address inequity merely shifted power dynamics between groups. A historical example the replacement
of traditional forest management system with government-initiated community user groups that reset
traditional leadership roles through the creation of new social elites within communities (Wakiyama,

Figure 5. Institutional conditions shaping the risk reduction arena.
The underlying conditions influencing institutional actions at different scales. (1) External institutions
are influenced by frameworks and policies that lead to knowledge dissemination, policy, and capacity
building for risk reduction. (2) Local institutions operate under social factors that create agency and
self-organization influencing their decisions within the risk reduction arena (Berkes & Ross, 2013). (3)
SES factors surrounding GLOF management also influence the risk reduction arena (Carey et al., 2012).

Thompson 17
2004). Additionally, it is reported in LAPA processes that leadership roles often exclude groups
marginalized indigenous groups and women (Peniston, 2013). This complemented by discussed case
studies from Peru highlights the importance of realizing the complex and often nuanced systems of
knowledge social structure that influence institutional management of GLOF risk reduction.
Building on this, knowledge dissemination to local communities is lacking. Most external institutions
focus on the generation of knowledge for science-policy interactions. Therefore, knowledge transfer
remains within the external institutions, rather than to more isolated mountain communities (Dorji et al,
2019). Knowledge collected by organizations such as CFGORRP are largely disseminated through static
means such as regional information centers or over radio. This shows that knowledge pathways remain
disjointed and noniterative, which can increase confusion, fear, and discontent within communities. This
is shown in the Imja Rolpa lake case study where lack of transparency of government efforts to minimize
risk lead to increasing distrust towards external institutions (Dahal & Hagelman, 2014). This is further
supported in an institutional capacity needs assessment conducted by CBFGORRP that analyzed each
department involved in climate adaption and disaster risk management. One of the major recognized
areas of need within each department is increased knowledge generation and its communication to
remote mountain regions. This reveals two major insights: (1) knowledge dissemination from external
to local institutions is inconsistent and largely lacking across institutions; (2) Interorganizational
cooperation is knowledge sharing is lacking clear pathways across scales. This is evident as limited
knowledge is listed as a weakness within each department of the government responsible for some
aspect of GLOF management (Khumari, 2014). Additional support for this claim comes from ICIMOD’s
report on Disaster Risk Reduction in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. In its key findings, the report emphasizes
the importance of increasing the resiliency of information systems that focuses on multi-stakeholder
inclusivity (Vaidya et al., 2019).

The challenges described above the highlight the legacy of institutional approaches to dealing with
Nepal’s mountain communities by the centralized government (Rhoades, 2007). Despite the rich
tapestry of knowledge on successfully dealing with local environmental stressors in the Khumbu region,
Sherpa communities still find themesleves at odds with the central government contributing to the
policy process. This is captured by Wakiyama’s (2004) analysis on the development of community user
groups that usurped traditional forest management systems over time. By failing to recognize the value
of informal institutions and causing power imbalances and discord in mountain communities. Current
external institutions often continue this trend in which development projects are framed within their
standards and objectives. Community input is considered a part of each framework, yet it is not always
practiced. For instance, the CFGORRP initiated risk reduction projects for Imja Rolpa through artificial
drainage and Early Warning Systems. However, despite the emphasis placed on local participation in
their project framework communities were subjected to fear and confusion from the lack of reporting by
agencies responsible for the mitigation work (Dahal & Hagelman, 2014).
This institutional gap is increasingly important as agency and organization for tourism efforts manifest at
local levels. For effective collaboration to take place within the Risk Reduction Arena (Figure 5), external
institutions must be able to to effectively navigate the values placed on tourism as an increasing source
of livelihood (Sherpa et al., 2019). Tourism have brought Sherpa communities to the global stage. With
this, access to information is increasing, while institutional decision-making and funding networks

Thompson 18
largely resemble historical mechanistic approaches often seen in development projects (Regmi & Star,
2014). Examples can be found in past UNDP and World Bank projects, where external institutions were
both the sources of information, funding, and project decision-making (Wakiyama, 2004). As this
balance continues to shift, institutions must recognize the agency and priorities that are shaping
Solukhumbu communities as they move forward.
5.4 LAPA case study
Through the creation and prioritization of the LAPA process,
2012 – Imja LAPA workshop held
it is clear that traditional issues such as gender equity and
2013 – Imja LAPA finalized
indigenous knowledge and inclusivity are now being built
into institutional policy for adaptation. However, there is still
2014 – Imja GLOF hazard risk assessment
a disconnect between external and local institutions that is
2015 – drainage system design completed
revealed through LAPA efforts that were initiated by the
UNDP in partnership with the Government of Nepal from
2015 – failed contract bidding causes delay
2013-2017 shown in Figure 6 (UNDP, 2014). Despite
increasing objectives for inclusion of social equity in the
2016 – construction preparation for lake
planning process, major adaptation actions (such as the
lowering begins
prioritized drainage project of the Imja Lake) are often
drastically delayed in their implmentation. For instance,
2017 – Project cycle ends
construction planning did not begin until 2016, leaving less
Figure 6. UNDP Imja Lake Project Timeline
than a year of the project duration for adaptation
implementation due to the beuracracy of the construction
contract bidding process (CFGORRP, 2017). This disconnect between knowledge being disseminated to
community members and concrete actions being taken can exacerbate existing distrust between
communities and external institutions. Institutional gaps such as this highlight the need for effective
policy that addresses.
This provides a concrete example of how the instutional gaps in Figure 4 regarding financial flows and
knowledge dissemination can cause potential conflict in the Risk Reduction Arena in Figure 5. This
disconnect between institutions regarding knowledge flow and adaptation actions can result in the
impediments such as perceived risk, knowledge disparity, and institutional instability when project cycle
transparency becomes an issue (Carey et al., 2015).

6. Conclusions
Overall, GLOF risk is an increasingly present hazard in the lives of mountain communities in Sagarmatha
National Park Buffer Zone. People’s perception of risk, and therefore response to adaptation measures
is a complex mix of social factors such as livelihoods, exposure, and spirituality that all shape an
individual’s evaluation of his or her vulnerability to glacial hazards. While these communities have a
strong history of creating local adaptation strategies that have shaped the geography and their way of
life, a tumultuous history of the central government has changed the institutional landscape and
communities’ relationship to the resources they rely on (Wakiyama, 2004). Shifting power dynamics

Thompson 19
towards a centralized approach to research management saw characterization of mountain
communities as periphery to the overall interest of the national government. This changed the
dichotomy of resource management from one of localized participation and use towards a more
exploitive regional development strategy, such as the creation of Sagarmatha National Park and the
promotion of the tourism industry (Rhoades, 2007). This time period saw the introduction of
international agenda setting, as international aid agencies influenced national policies towards a more
pro-development agenda and economic liberalization. More recent efforts to create decentralized
management strategies have led to the disjointed creation of formal local institutions such as buffer
zone user groups that often exist in direct competition to the institutions (Wakiyama, 2004). This shows
that there is a clear disconnect between external institutions, and local informal institutions that have
been shaped by unique geography, culture, and social structure.
As community-based disaster risk reduction becomes more of a national priority (such as in Nepal’s
NAPA), the value of local and informal institutions needs to be recognized by external institutions and
play a more critical role in developing adaptation strategies to glacial hazards. This includes not only the
incorporation of local knowledge into risk reduction strategies at the local level, but also the recognition
of informal decision-making structures into national policy. There are several additional conditions that
need to be addressed for effective institutional action to take place. Knowledge dissemination needs to
be developed into clear pathways that address different organizations at each scale. Throughout this
analysis, communication of knowledge and ideas is a clear barrier to effective interorganizational
coordination. This includes clear and consistent knowledge sharing between the Government of Nepal,
national and international organizations, and the incorporation of local knowledge into policy. In
addition to the coordination of information, funding streams need to be effectively managed between
institutions to ensure project continuity and scalability.
While the institution of GLOF management has changed from external agencies to a more localized
process, it is important to recognize that these organizations have shaped this process and are still
present. The implementation of LAPA processes marks an important milestone in external institutions
recognition of localized adaptation strategies through building community agency and self-organization
as described by Shaw (2012). However, the funding mechanisms remain disconnected and delayed from
the LAPA process, barring the adaptation strategies prioritized from becoming a reality (Regmi & Star,
2014). Moving forward, policy mechanisms need to transform these funding mechanisms to ensure the
money coming from international agencies able to be effectively utilized by local institutions that can
more effectively manage these strategies in their perspective regions. This can help to overcome the
traditional difficulties of centralized strategies attempting to implement projects under the difficulties of
difficult terrains and disconnected knowledge of local concerns. Overall, this paper has painted an
institutional landscape that visualizes information, policy, and funding networks and connects them to a
more theoretical understanding of community-based adaptation efforts. Additionally, it forms a
connection to the perceptions at the household level that offers key insight into how community
members perceive adaptation efforts moving forward.

Thompson 20
Acknowledgements
This project was made possible by the National Science Foundation under the grant number CNH1516912. I would like to thank Dr. Milan Shrestha, Dr. Netra Chhetri, and Dr. Datu Buyung Agusdinata
for their support and guidance throughout this research process. Additional thanks to the project team
that collected the household survey data for the Sherpa et al. (2019) study during the summer months
of 2016 and 2017 that also provide an integral part of this research project.

Appendix A. 2016 – 2017 questionnaire subset
Question
What type of the problems you have encountered in water supply?
What was your response to cope with the events?
How would you know if the flooding is to occur?
What is the source from which you heard of climate change? Check all that apply.
If not, what is your main livelihood or income source?
In your opinion, what are the main challenges or problems for tourism in Khumbu?
What is the major natural disasters or uncertainties do you consider significant for tourism? Choose
one
Would you relocate your business to different location, if the threat of flooding is imminent?
If you are concerned about the lake, who do you think should take the lead to do something?
What do you think should pay for draining?

Thompson 21
7.

Bibliography

Agrawal, A and C.C. Gibson (2001). ‘The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation’ in A.
Agrawal and C.C. Gibson (ed.) Communities and the Environment: Ethnicity, Gender, and the State
in Community-Based Conservation. London: Rutgers University Press
Bjønness, I.-M., 1986. Mountain Hazard Perception and Risk-Avoiding Strategies among the Sherpas of
Khumbu Himal , Nepal. Mountain Research and Development, 6(4), pp.277–292.
Berkes, F., Ross, H. (2013) Community Resilience: Toward an Integrated Approach, Society & Natural
Resources, 26:1, 5-20, DOI:10.1080/08941920.2012.736605
Bishwokarma, D., Paudel, N. S., & Molina, J. J. (2012). Civil Society Organizations in Climate Change
Policy Dynamics in Nepal: How Representative and Inclusive is the Process? TMC Academic Journal,
7(1), 1–12. Retrieved from https://www.tmc.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/TMC-AcadJournal-Vol-07-Issue-1.pdf#page=17
Byers, A.C. & Thakali, S., 2015. Khumbu , Nepal : Local Adaptation Plan of Action ( Lapa ).
Byers, A., et al. (2015). HIGH MOUNTAINS ADAPTATION PARTNERSHIP: Lessons Learned from Nepal and
Peru. United States Agency for International Development.
Carey, M. (2010). In the shadow of melting glaciers: Climate change and Andean society. Oxford
University Press.
Carey, M. et al., 2012. An integrated socio-environmental framework for glacier hazard management
and climate change adaptation: Lessons from Lake 513, Cordillera Blanca, Peru. Climatic Change,
112(3–4), pp.733–767.
CFGORRP (2014). Institutional Capacity Needs Assessment. Community Based Flood and Glacial Lake
Outburst Risk Reduction Project. Kumari Kripa Marg, Samakhusi, Kathmandu
CFGORRP. (2017). What we achieved so far. United Nations Development Program
DNPWC (2006) Sagarmatha National Park Management and Tourism Plan 2006–2011. Department of
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC), Kathmandu, Nepal
DNPWC. (2016). Sagarmartha National Park and its Buffer Zone Management Plan 2016-2020.
Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC), Namche Bazaar, Solukhumbu,
Nepal
Dorji, L., Authors, L., Shrestha, A., Nightingale, A., Shrestha, K., Watto, M. A., … Khan, N. A. (2019).
Governance: Key for Environmental Sustainability in the Hindu Kush Himalaya.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92288-1_16

Thompson 22
Eiser, J. R., Bostrom, A., Burton, I., Johnston, D. M., Mcclure, J., Paton, D., … White, M. P. (2012). Risk
interpretation and action: A conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.002
Hatfield-Dodds, S., Nelson, R., & Cook, D. C. (2007, February). Adaptive governance: an introduction, and
implications for public policy. In Paper provided by Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics
Society in its series 2007 Conference (51st) (No. 10440).
Jones, S., Oven, K. J., & Wisner, B. (2016). A comparison of the governance landscape of earthquake risk
reduction in Nepal and the Indian State of Bihar. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.10.011
Karkee, R., & Comfort, J. (2016). NGOs, Foreign Aid, and Development in Nepal. Frontiers in Public
Health, 4, 177. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00177
Khatri-Chhetri J. B. 1993. ‘Indigenous management of Forest Resources: A Case Study of Jomson. VDC in
Mustang District, From Indigenous Management of Natural Resources in Nepal’ in D. Tamang, G.J
Gill and C.B. Thapa (ed.) Indigenous Management of Natural Resources in Nepal. Winrock
Institutional Policy Analysis in agriculture and related resource management
CFGORRP (2014). Institutional Capacity Needs Assessment. Community Based Flood and Glacial Lake
Outburst Risk Reduction Project. Kumari Kripa Marg, Samakhusi, Kathmandu
McDowell, G., Huggel, C., Frey, H., Wang, F. M., Cramer, K., & Ricciardi, V. (2019). Adaptation action and
research in glaciated mountain systems: Are they enough to meet the challenge of climate change?
Global Environmental Change, 54, 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.10.012
Ministry of Environment. (2010). National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) Retrieved from
https://www.adaptation-undp.org/sites/default/files/downloads/nepal_napa.pdf
Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological
systems. Science, 325(5939), 419-422.
Peniston, B. (2013). HIGH MOUNTAINS ADAPTATION PARTNERSHIP A Review of Nepal’s Local Adaptation
Plans of Action (LAPA). Retrieved from
https://www.climatelinks.org/sites/default/files/asset/document/NepalLAPAs_Stocktaking_TMIPeniston-FINAL.pdf
Rhoades, R. E. (2007). Listening to the Mountains. Kendall/Hunt.
Rajib Shaw, (2012) Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction (Community, Environment and
Disaster Risk Management, Volume 10) Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Regmi, B. R., & Star, C. (2014). Identifying operational mechanisms for mainstreaming community-based
adaptation in Nepal. Climate & Development, 6(4), 306–317.

Thompson 23
Rounce, D. R., McKinney, D. C., Lala, J. M., Byers, A. C., & Watson, C. S. (2016). A New Remote Hazard
and Risk Assessment Framework for Glacial Lakes in the Nepal Himalaya. Hydrology and Earth
System Sciences Discussions, (2013), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2016-161
Sherpa, S. F., Shrestha, M., Eakin, H., & Boone, C. G. (2019). Cryospheric hazards and risk perceptions in
the Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Park and Buffer Zone, Nepal. Natural Hazards, 1-20.
Shrestha, B.B. & Nakagawa, H., 2014. Assessment of potential outburst floods from the Tsho Rolpa
glacial lake in Nepal. Natural Hazards, 71(1), pp.913–936. Available
at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-013-0940-3
Stevens, Stanley F. (1996). Claiming the high ground: Sherpas, subsistence, and environmental change in
the highest Himalaya. Motilal Banarsidass Publishe.
UNDP. (2014). Community Based Flood and Glacial Lake Outburst Risk Reduction Project (CFGORRP).
Vaidya, A., Shrestha, M. S., & Nasab, N. (2019). Disaster Risk Reduction and Building Resilience in the
Hindu Kush Himalaya. In The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment (pp. 389–419).
Wakiyama, T. (2004). Community Forestry in Nepal: A Comparison of Management Systems between
Indigenous Forestry and Modern Community Forestry. Policy Trend Report 2004. Retrieved from
http://www.iges.or.jp/en/fc/pdf/report11/full_text.pdf
Watanabe, T., Lamsal, D., & Ives, J. D. (2009). Evaluating the growth characteristics of a glacial lake and
its degree of danger of outburst flooding: Imja Glacier, Khumbu Himal, Nepal. Norsk Geografisk
Tidsskrift, 63(4), 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/00291950903368367