a common property resource in transition-jfm experiences-jravishanker-2000

Year 2000.

A Common Property Resource in Transition. Experiences from village Kheda. Year 2000. A Process documentation. by : J. Ravi Shanker. NM Sadguru Water and Development Foundation, Dahod.

1

1.Lessons and Future Research issues in JFM:

Ø The policy of JFM is still not very clear and needs revision in light of

experiences like Kheda and Mathwa villages. So that it can develop

to a national programme character, which is not at present.

Ø Role of facilitators (NGOs) need to be given official status to

intervene in matters related to conservation and benefit sharing on

sustainable basis. Currently they have no official status (as it is in new

GR of Madhya Pradesh).

Ø Comprehensive programme is needed, to promote JFM on larger

scale with community and NGO active participation. For this the

State should invite and involve more and more NGOs as it has done

in National Watershed programme and PIM in Andhra Pradesh.

Ø Separate budgets to be allocated for JFM execution with clear

project outlines. This only can ensure proper and sustainable growth

of forests. Currently many state forest departments are not convinced

on the fact that Forest Protection Committees are capable of

managing funds and forests.

Ø There should be a mix of ecological and economic goals in

community conservation projects like JFM. Currently the state

officials are promoting JFM on pure ecological lines and people are

demanding viable economic returns (NTFPs, small Timber, Wood,

etc).

Ø There should be clear‘ institutional structure’ to promote JFM from

grassroots, to ensure its proper execution right from State


2

headquarters to grassroots. Currently the officials have no obligation

or duty to serve on JFM and the portfolio often shunted between

different sections with in department and MoEF.

Ø It is generally not sustainable to manage CPR forests without

political will in Legislature and administrative commitment in

Executive. Experiences like Kheda or Mathwa are clear examples.

Ø The issue of succession, increase in family size are some of the

hurdles in managing the JFM forests on long term.

Ø Gender issues, if not considered at the initial stage, status of women

perhaps, will not change in later course even after reservation of

their seats in Executive Committee or on any other decision making

body.


3

2. INTRODUCTION:

The CPR forest situation in India has emerged out of interesting

historical developments in the last century. British presence in the late-

18th century started to change land and forest usage (communal to state

ownership) pattern in India. Guided by commercial interests the forests

were viewed as crown lands and alienated the people from their former

common resource regimes, leading to over use of resources. Later in the

post independence era, after abolition of the princely states and

landlordism, all uncultivated lands went under the State control

(Poffernberger and McGean (1996). Large tracts were handed over to

Forest Department as ‘protected forests’ and the remaining were vested

with village Panchayats(local governance) or under district collectorate

as revenue lands.

No longer we are in a position to blame oldies for all the misdeeds we

carried out in post independence era. After all, how long one can blame

‘East India Company’ or others for forest destruction, when what we

mismanaged in later part is of greater concern. Massive felling of trees

took place in these forests (under ex-princely states) because of the fear

that they would be nationalised, as indeed they were in 1950s and 60s.

For several years this impression has continued in the villages that if

trees are planted on private lands, not only would the trees belong to

government but the land on which such planting occurs would also

revert to government (N.C. Saxena 1998). This attitude was strikingly


4

visible in the experiences of prominent NGOs who tried to promote

farm and agro forestry in 70s in the tribal regions.

Similar developments observed in Gujarat where there were more

princely states. Most lands classified as forest lands were inherited from

some 200 ex-princely states. The local rulers leased out forests to

contractors for timber felling (ibid. 108) before they were inherited by

State (GOI). People were involved in large scale in these operations.

The same commons were logged in this period. British might have used

it for infrastructure development in past, but after independence, the

logging was indiscriminate and mere wastage of natural resource.

Adding to this, the strong cooperative movement in the state of Gujarat

where the timber logging contract was transferred from forest

contractors to the cooperatives to enable communities earn higher

incomes from forest harvests. The leaders of these cooperatives wielded

considerable political influence, and some built up large capital bases

(Femconsult 1995). In the later part, high industrialisation influenced

people from less-developed tribal regions to migrate in large scale,

leaving the commons to their fate. On the other hand the farm forestry

which was successful by 80s in some corners, reduced the dependency of

people on commons and hence ignored where it was not successful,

people up-rooted the remaining root stock to meet domestic needs.

With the increasing population pressures the need for agriculture land

forced people towards encroaching commons. When the forest


5

department tried to plant trees on the commons they were often

removed by people to demonstrate their right over these lands.

Successive governments also regularised(privatise) these

encroachments. This raised concerns over the political will favoring

commons? However, N.C.Saxena felt that, the political system has

generally been resilient and responsive to public opinion, which can be

built up without a proletarian revolution being a necessary pre-

condition. This lights some ray of hope for future of CPR forests which

are clouded.

Joint Forest Management has come in way addressing some of the

issues pertinent to forest rehabilitation. The national figures may be

rosy. Perhaps greater clarity in resolving some of the bottlenecks would

mean a world of difference to CPR forests. In some states, the lack of

consistency in political will to promote JFM has lead to a situation

where the enabling agencies (NGO and Forest Department) strive in

mutually conflicting situations, antagonizing each other.

On the other hand, several studies concluded that the short-term

political motivation of the panchayat leaders and cattle pressure would

not allow community managed plantations to continue for very long.

Panchayats are often political organisations, with difficulties in meeting

financial responsibilities in CPR management from their own sources.

More over the political rivalry often leads to factionalism that deter the

CPR status. However, as a section of 3 tier administrative structure,


6

panchayaats gained serious status in governance at grassroots. 73rd

amendment also gave various privileges to panchayats in managing and

controlling the village resource system.

Unfortunately, still many Panchayats in India still not fully aware about

their powers and duties towards communal resources. Evidences suggest

that, even though Panchayats were given rights to take control the non-

timber forest produce (NTFP), they seldom succeed in channeling the

benefits to village or village poor. In India, these commodities so far

controlled and marketed together by bureaucracy (Forest Development

Corporations) and market (local dealers) where the common man

remained as mere manual laborer.

Empirical studies suggests that factors such as village size, homogeneity,

remoteness, dependency over the commons, location of the CPR forests

and leadership attitude lead to success of CPR management. All the

above factors are generally does not exist and positively influence the

CPR resource system as they are not under controlled condition. The

conducive policy environment and pro-people administration is

generally found effective in promoting CPRs. But local collective action

has been undermined by a number of political and economic processes

(Bardhan 1993). Do the initiatives succeed in complex markets and

political coercion supporting the rich and powerful, in a democratic set

up of India?


7

2.1 Forest history and retrospect:

Taking in to account, forest lands have had history of rich teak and

bamboo. Large scale felling of teak occurred before independence

where the wood transported for ship building and railways in the second

world war time. The logging informally continued for a long period of

time. People use to cut trees and sell them in local markets when

needed. One farmer in Khunta Dalji village of Rajasthan said that 50

years back they used to sell 1 cubic foot of teak at the rate of Rs.1. He

said the pressure of population was also low and there were enough

trees for every one. Most of the adjacent forests (Mahudi village forest)

harvested for making charcoal and marketed to contractors, before they

were transferred to State by princely states just before independence.

People remember that the village was under the rule of princely state

Gadi Pratapur (now is in Rajasthan State). People paid taxes at Gadi on

agriculture (discussion with Kamjibhai ex-president of FPC, 97.) in

Kheda village of Gujarat.

Wild life survived till early independence period (1950s). However the

ground was cleared by Forest labor cooperatives in `60s logged all the

remaining forests in Gujarat. In Kheda all the teak and bamboo forests

were logged at the instance of State. People at that time were in search

of economic options to survive and they found that logging trees provide

employment to meet increasing family expenses. People now say that

they were not aware about the consequences at that time. After that,

repeated grazing and continuous exploitation for 30 long years has


8

degraded the forests to dust and rocks. Even root stock was also

extorted in many places to meet fuel demands (ibid.).

Lately, informal arrangements came into existence. Powerful people in

village started contracting the fodder for 6 months in an year, between

monsoon and winter. The land opened for grazing once the fodder grass

harvested. It was sold to people at higher rates by these contractors.

Rest of the 6 months barn forests were exposed to high temperatures

and indiscriminate grazing. Soil compaction took place over the years

and soils became impermeable. Moisture stress also remained high in

summers. And the degradation continued where people looked towards

more productive options in urban centers.

2.2 SWDF & JFM:

i). Organisational Policy:

♦ Work in collaboration with State to ensure that the State

administration and community finally come together for a venture

like JFM where they are the principle stake holders.

♦ Promote community access and management in governing common

property resources like forests and water through direct resource

intervention, network, policy advocacy and mobilising funds for

actoin.

♦ Promote stake of women in resource management by reserving 50%

stake in village institutional membership and in Executive


9

Committees of the respective institutions. If state laws are not

promoting the same, then research and advocate for the same.

♦ Promote other NGOs and departments in the region working for

natural resources issues, by giving technical support, guidance in

policy matters and familiarising/facilitating with state functionaries.

♦ Establish model technically and socially sites for replication and

research on sustainable growth patterns (economic and social)so that

scaling up of the activity can be realised in similar regions elsewhere.

ii). Approach:

SWDF has implemented JFM on experimental basis in one village with

integrated natural resource intervention model, where water resources,

private wasteland development, irrigation development and micro

watershed development through community groups. This experience

proved successful as community successfully took over the responsibility

of natural resource management SWDF has expanded JFM to 27

villages in Gujarat and Rajasthan.

Community & Livelihoods:

Most of the households (largely tribals) lived life under continuous

migration for about 9 months a year as the land productivity was too low

to meet minimum subsistence of the family.


10

The agriculture is mainly rain fed. Even though ‘hand dug well

irrigation’ was there it formed a tiny fraction of the total cultivated

land. Most of the wells dry up in summer. Maize, Wheat, Gram being

the main rainfed crops the village survived largely on income earned

from migration. As a result people did not show much concern towards

CPRs getting degraded. What ever little common land (wasteland)

remained that too encroached by adjacent cultivators to meet the ever

expanding family and inheritance.(retrospective group discussion 1996).

Here it is not the population but the option for new family created after

marriage lead to encroachments, land being scarce resource. The

availability of labor outside is also unconfined and susceptible to

changes.

Initial efforts:

Initially people were encouraged to take up small scale agro-forestry

and farm forestry plantations on marginal lands and private lands. This

has fulfilled the firewood and timber wood needs to an extent. Later

they were encouraged to protect the degraded forest area with a new

arrangement, where every one contributes in protection for forest

regeneration and holds, right over the produce. But then as it was

already under a kind of management (strong outside control), the

process of another change in forest management was more complicated

than originally thought of. For a long period of time people were out of

managing forests on sustainable basis for livelihoods and there were also

more than one stakeholder.


11

Complexities and political, financial & social realities in which the

community exists, will finally govern the resource system. Here the role

of NGOs extend a supportive hand in handling the complexities and still

progress ahead. The hard line, rigid bureaucracy can hardly be in a

position to influence change in the community situation. Quite often it

is found that, the community gets so habituated to a set of dynamics that

the community can never be able to change itself unless some strong

external influence occurs. Under process approach, only new leadership

can again foresee this change.

Table .2.

Activities carried out in addition to JFM by NGO.

Studying the resource sustainability and its nature, it is found that there

is fundamental difference in resource augmentation and disposability.

The risk factor in sustainable resource conservation is higher in CPR

forests to that of CPR water. The problems associated with its easy

liquidity, and mobility like proximity to the market, state boundaries and

informal (unauthorised) harvesting behaviors makes it a persistent

problem in CPR forests. The degree of problem and its recurrence is

less with CPR water. Long gestation periods in forestry also makes it

more vulnerable. The resource.

SWDF & Forest Department.

The ownership of the land and resources belong to State. As a result,

Sadguru pursued the villagers to get into an agreement with forest

department to legitemise the forest protection under JFM programme


12

when it came into existence after 1991. In Kheda village more than 80%

of the households formally became members of the Forest Protection

Committee (about118 HH) at that time.

It took 2 years to get sanction and agreement with State Forest

Department in the pilot village. In others followed it took more than

that.

Role of SWDF:

♦ Mobilise the Community,

♦ Manage Funds for socil conservation and social mobilisation works

♦ Develop technical plan with the help of forest department and

execute with the help of Community.

♦ Help the community in registering the VFI as cooperative

♦ Build the capacity of Community in managing the forests

independently

Role of Forest Department:

♦ Allocate the forest land to village Community

♦ Get in to agreement with the community on conservation rights,

duties and benefit sharing.

♦ Help the NGO in developing micro-plan for forest development.

Role of village Community:

♦ Enforce the agreement and protect the forests.

♦ Participate in micro-plan execution.

♦ Review and develop forest protection mechanism from time to time.


13

♦ Conduct Gram Sabha and make decisions in common interest of the

community and forests.

♦ Seek help from the Forest Department in forest conservation when

ever needed.

10. Major issues:

Broadly catagorising, the issues of future there will be 1. The issue of

succession, 2. Membership, 3. Diversified interests, 4. Ecological v/s

commercial harvest, 5. Change in leadership, 6. Change in attitudes

from conservation to commercialisation.

i). Institutional issues:

The VFI vis-à-vis JFM in Kheda faced many ups and downs in past

seven years. When it started its work, being first of its kind in the region;

faced tremendous pressure in protecting the forests. The department

officials also being ‘not so convinced’ about the programme, were non-

cooperative. Twice adhoc evaluations were conduction over the

performance of VFI and show cause notice were served over the

achievements and failures in re-establishing the forests in the first

couple of years itself. The environment was very hostile and not at all

conducive either for NGO or for VFI.

ii). Vegetation related issues:

Initially the choice of species and site were not matching and they have

not survived. Later the VFI made some changes to its original micro

plan and allotted some area as pasture depending on its suitability


14

classification. Exotic varieties were replaced with enrichment

plantations and seed sowing . Overall the silviculture operations yielded

good results with the VFI. The changes adopted in original micro-plan,

emphasizing on enrichment plantations has helped the VFI to a great

extent.

Kheda VFI faced some other problems such as members within the

committee getting involved in forest theft. Committee later disqualified

those members who were involved in the act for five years period of

time. This has not helped the VFI much, as other villagers involved in

forest theft. The main reason for the increasing forest theft is the good

growth of teak which can already fetch Rs. 300 per pole.

The fodder needs is not a major issue as majority of the village lands

were covered under irrigation and the fodder demand can be met from

agriculture lands. However the change in resource pattern creates some

pressure on the livestock. In 1998 the VFI has decided to open some

areas of forest land for free grazing, as the timber stock has grown to a

substantial height.

iii). Issue of membership:

After 7 years the problem of non-members cropped up as new houses

emerged in the span of 7 years as a matter of succession and

inheritance. The new families as non-members who are separately

settled after marriage are currently getting benefits on payments. Over


15

the years if the original member dies, then as per the cooperative law in

India, the elder son will be the successor. Other sons who separated and

settled in the village as new families are to be registered as new

members.

On a average each family having 5 children, leads to at least 3 new

members. Each year roughly 10 new families are claiming stake over

CPR forests1. At this rate there will be 400 new families at the end of 40

years where some of the Teak stock will be ready for harvest, totaling

@550 families. But the VFI is not prepared to this situation and not

clear about the entry fee for new members. If it is calculated at the rate

of NPV of forest as a result of protection by new members, then the

entry fee will be very high for ‘still poor’ new families, and undermines

the “equity” aspect in community resource rights. If they keep the

entry fee low then their efforts and energy in re-establishing the forests

gets un-economically vaulted and proves wrong.

iv). Agreement:

The current agreement is silent about many aspects of the future tree

wealth. Community anticipates trouble at that stage when final felling is

carried out. More over the agreement has vested enormous powers with

the DFO, the State representative in disqualifying the Committee at any

point of time for any reason that does not satisfy him(largely). This

creates a sense of dis-pleasure as the state has right over the forest land


16

but the produce is result of conservation efforts by the community and

State should keep its role limited.

v). Future of the resource:

The major issues of contention in future will be the final felling. Many

things would change by then. It takes at least 40 years for teak to reach a

stage of harvest under the new practice of teak harvest. However,

experts say that it should be harvested around 60 to 80 years. Imagine

what happens when a first harvest carried out between 40 to 80 years.

The generations would change, ownership succession would change as

new families emerging in village. With changing socio-political life,

older generations who formulated and agreed on conservation

principles would differ to that of what the younger generations

perspectives. This will lead to either positive or negetive trends as far as

CPR forests are concerned, as these forests under regeneration

predominantly are teak forests.

The complexity of social relations create conflicts in benefit sharing on

the principles of excludebility. Do people who have had active role in

forest protection in its intial stage, or at a stage in later period possess

rights over the produce? What if the person drifted away from village in

search of livelihood. There will be series of such problems in this context

and the issues may consolidate in resource degradation.

1 Calculated at the current growth rate of 118 families in 1993 to 191 families in 1999.


17

vi). Change in state policies:

Repeated changes in State policy towards peoples duties and rights

towards JFM is a major issue. These amendments result in a sense of

insecurity among community questioning whether they finally get

benefited after protection or state one fine morning will declare ‘here

after all the CPR forests belong to State again’. Secondly,

encroachments are however remain as future issue also, as

encroachments ( as such termed by State) are regularised by State time

and again.

The issue of 60/40 or 80/20 benefit sharing ratio, or what ever exists

would also create trouble at the time of felling as people may not be

ready to give up any portion of the benefit. Even if they have to (legally

as per the agreement) they manage to get more than their share by all

means as their proximity to forests is higher than others. This may not

be a fairer perception towards the community, but to be pragmatic, it is

fair to pre-suppose certain complexities as a practitioner.

Let us suppose that the VFI, federations and their apex bodies

collectively decide one agenda on the final felling, respective share,

distribution. Wouldn’t it be utopian to think that the committee accepts

the decision of apex body in larger interest. Even if VFI accepts, should

the entire village accepts the decision. This may also lead to conflict and

social unrest at larger scale. More over in countries like India which are

politically active, the influence of political parties would be high, when it


18

comes to benefit sharing out of CPRs. Political vested interests can lead

the population to different goals that not necessarily hold stand by the

same conservation principles and agreements. There are evidences to

this effect with in this region and in Gujarat. How could a federation or

an apex body be free from political interference.

If social unrest or dispute among people or community occurs at the

time of distribution, the chance of forest getting under complete threat

is clear. The situation may go back to square one. Precisely, where we

started conservation. In some of the African countries the forest cover

came to a ‘climax’, and the socio-political conditions fueled it to further

degradation. Now these countries (Sahel, Sudan, Ethiopia etc) are

trying to re-establish the forests again.

vii). Sustainability issue:

Even NGOs could hardly play a role here as it is the matter of parting

away from the ‘harvest’ of benefits from CPRs rather collaboration for

‘conservation’ or augmentation of ‘future benefits’. No village situation

would ever cooperate to give away a huge amount of CPR resources.

The emerging issues in west Bengal and the issues of van Gujjars could

be understood on similar lines, may be at a different scale. The issues of

parting away with degraded CPRs could be different to that of potential

CPRs with immediate benefits, where people collectively invested in

their regeneration and waited for long to realise benefits.


19

Trees are also susceptible for theft and smuggling. The only factor that

will ensure forest sustenance is long-term positive relation between

State officials and people and undoubted respect to each others

position. When they work in collaboration they could together resolve

their issues even outside the framework of the State policies. When the

VFIs perform well and get into the governance of village they hold

much better position and advantage than those who are separately

managing forest resources. The VFI members posses additional powers

to manage political influences. Being on Panchayati Raj system they,

also hold some additional administrative powers at village level and that

cushions the dealings with State departments or bureaucracy

independently. Thirdly they could also resist the interference of vested

interest with in the society as they possess the authority to stop any such

interest. Most of the VFIs, stand alone need strength to sustain and

survive.

viii). Gender and CPRs:

To ensure livelihood to the family has, predominantly been concern of

women in society. It is a misquote at least in tribal society of Dahod or

where Bhill tribes reside, that husband is a bread winner. Women as

mother or wife often takes on the responsibility to feed the family and

cares its integrity in social and economical aspects of village life. This

results in managing day to day affairs of household which makes her

exploit the available resources to run the family. Inevitably she depends

on forest for firewood, small timer, and other produce like, roots, leafs,


20

etc, to sustain her family. This for long, has been portrayed as undue

burden on the resource and blamed her for forest destruction(the

predominant notion among villagers and officials at grassroots).

On the contrary men exploit forest for timber that involves total felling.

The cash they earn often used for non-domestic purposes chiefly

individualised (like alcohol) . Whether it is state leadership or local,

these men often manage to get into VFI leadership and blame women

for largely indulging in forest tress pass. Women were also given place in

managing VFIs as partners in protecting the land from trespass, on the

pretext of sustainable forest management with gender equality. This way

of reserving minimum 2 seats in VFI management will not address her

problems with livelihoods and forests. As a result the forest protection

has never benefited women much in many cases in the country.

Deeply thinking, it will be more clear that how women can cope up with

ensuring livelihood on one end and involve in sustainable forest

management(JFM?). How come we expect women to stand up and

resist at large (not talking about isolated cases or success stories) against

management practices at grassroots when the unequal pay for

comparable work still in practice, financial credit, still not accessible to

women, inheritance of property (land) still a far fetch dream, and access

to normal family benefits, bank loans etc are sharply limited.


21

Women’s relative poverty and political factors, also limit her capacity to

realise the rights guaranteed to her by law. Lack of education, access to

right information and their socialization, family responsibilities from

young age etc, prevents her from asserting herself in social life to gain

access to resources and take decisions in favor of her living. Mere

institutionalization or legalizing her percentage of nomination does not

represent her realization of status, and will not solve her problems. A

conscious and committed effort by all external agents who are involved,

should pursue clear agenda with strong conviction.

Intensive and repetitive training should be encouraged at all levels of

the system in GOs and NGOs. This needs prioritization by funders

where they allocate budgets under various heads. State it self has so far

not invested much in HRD to its personnel and NGO personnel in

facilitating CPR management. Often in many workshops, forums,

research deliberations, it is found that this gender issues are taken as

necessary evil, to get a politically correct status. Unfortunately this

attitude (gender issues or topics often prescribed to women as exclusive

topic) would create further complexities in CPR context, pushing her

aside.


22

Appendix: 1

Summary of Kheda Forest area development and management action plan (Transcription from the ‘Action plan document, 1994’ Gujarati language.) : Location: The forest land is located on the boarder of Rajasthan and Gujarat states of western India. It is 11 km away from Jhalod town in Gujarat. Market and other facilities are available for the farmers and there is also proper approach road constructed in 1997. The entire village is electrified. Geo-physical conditions: It is located between 74-15 to 23-12 longitude and latitude with undulating topography with severe slopes. The slops vary in different groups right from 2% to 70%. The total forest area measured at 84.15 hectares. The average rainfall of this region is 870 mm and climatic condition is classified in sub-humid. Rainfall varies from place to place through out the season leading to frequent occurrence of drought. Status of the land: In 1993 the land came under Joint forest management when it was completely degraded, where the produce of rehabilitated forest be shared by state forest department and village tree growers cooperative. To this effect an agreement was made with forest department where the NGO (SWDF) facilitated the process. The land was degraded to less than 2% canopy cover when JFM was initiated. Measures for rehabilitation: Detailed soil and moisture conservation works were planned and executed according to their need and importance. These measures are: 1. Protection trench and stone wall This is to protect the forest land from open grazing practices. Entire forest area stone walled and cattle protection trench was also excavated to provide additional protection. Prosopis Juliflora was promoted with dual purpose; as live fence and source of fuel wood for the families who earlier survived on teak root stock. 2. Gully pluging or checks Where ever soil eroded and rill formation took place and deep gullies were formed, Gully plugging was done to check further erosion. 3. Grade stabilisation structures


23

To level the surface of nalla which is prone to erosion and stop further increase in slopes as per need with estimated intervals, stone walls are erected. 4. Gradonis With increasing slops on hill sides the runoff remains at high velocity. With this, less water percolates in to soil resulting in low moisture levels. To increase soil moisture it is important to reduce runoff velocity through gradonis at short intervals. The vertical difference between two gradonis kept at 2mt., 5. Staggered trenches On contours at 2mt., distance trenches are excavated to control soil erosion and runoff water. With this soil moisture increased and water is allowed to percolate into soils. Measures were taken to conserve optimum water where ever it was possible as per site conditions. 7. Vegetative measures The entire land area being highly eroded with severe slopes and exposed rocks, vegetation measures were a must. This ensures soils from runoff and improve the moisture levels. Further direct seed sowing of grasses enrich and establish vegetation on the degraded lands. Local grass varieties were promoted and used in multiple ways as Seven varieties of grass were available in this forest area locally. 8. Plantations. The entire area is slopy rocky and mountanious. About 40 hectare of land is totally degraded with almost no single tree existing when it was taken under JFM. Initially multiple trees were suggested for promotion along the contours. However the root stock regeneration and silviculture operations were part of the vegetation management plan as second phase of interventions. Enrichment plantations were done on higher ridges.


24

Appendix: 2

Active roles as performed Different Activities carried out by VFI, FD & NGO in JFM during 1993 to 2000.

VFI Forest Department

SWDF

Forest micro plan 4 4 4 Fund mobilisation 4 Contributions 4 Mobilising people 4 Execution of plan 4 4 S&M works 4 4 Protection 4 Corrective action 4 4 Rules & regulations 4 4 Registration of VFI 4 4 Agreement on rights 4 4

Benefit sharing 4 4 Organising village assembly

4 4

Monitoring forest growth

4 4

Evaluation of forest development

4

Micro watershed 4 4 Lift irrigation 4 Water harvesting 4 Afforstation 4 Well recharging 4 4 Capacity building 4 4 Accounts & Audit 4 4


25

Study Methodology:

Essentially a process documentation, collecting the events and key

elements that triggered the process of JFM and kept the community in

constant persuasion towards retaining the forest resource. The three

major actors in the process are Forest department, Village community

and Non-government organisation. Even though the entire details of

process not considered for documentation, the trends in process and

some of the main features are captured. Data collection chiefly

depended on primary and secondary evidence and analysis was done on

the available data. Simple tables, and maps are used to give provide

glimpse of study area and easy understanding of the situation.

To arrive at the current documentation, relevant studies, documents and

state policy circulars are referred. The historical developments in Indian

forest resources juxtaposed to understand the context in which the

document is prepared.

Data collection:

The information chiefly collected from village community through

group meetings, key person interviews at primary level and reference to

NGO documentation, progress reports, field notes of staff and office

records and correspondence at secondary level. This process has taken

note of 7 years, starting from 1993 to end of 1999.


26

Group discussions with the village community at household level and at

VFI level conducted during 1995,96,97,98 and 99 at different periods.

Information of meetings with forest department and NGO are also used

in the process.

Interpretation:

Attempt in general, has been made to present the information in its

original form. Simple analysis is carried out where ever possible with out

complicating the presentation style. However, stress has been laid on

the ‘point of view’ of community, as the information largely derived at

grassroots situation. A summary of the lessons learned and further

implications for research is presented in the beginning of the document.

Limitation:

Author being associated with the process for over five years, some

amount of subliminal conviction can not be avoided. However, attempt

has been made to overcome this bias.


27

References:

Government of Gujarat resolution: No. 5 RC-1099-635-G;1/11/99.

Government of Gujarat resolution/Forest and Environment dept:

No.FCA/1090-125-K(part-3);2-91;6-94

Correspondence between FD, SWDF and Kheda Village JFM

Cooperative society;1993 to1999.

Kheda JFM action plan document. 1994.

Office file of Kheda village at SWDF 1993 to 1999.

Saga of Joint Forest Management in India; Dr. N.C. Saxena:1999.

State Level Working Group meeting, Gujarat Forest Department,

minutes: 1 to 14.


28

Acknowledgements.

I sincerely acknowledge the contribution of Kheda village community

and forest department in producing this document. I thank my

Director, Shri Harnath Jagawat for his comments, and painstaking

editorial work of Ms. Harmeet. I also extend my thanks to Mr. Aswin

Patel, who was involved through out data collection work in the village

and explained the intricacies of different elements in JFM, at grassroots.

Ravi Shanker.

a common property resource in transition-jfm experiences-jravishanker-2000

Documents