chapter 2 review of literatureshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in › bitstream › 10603 › 33250 › 13...
TRANSCRIPT
12
Chapter 2
Review of Literature
This chapter deals with the review of available literature on phytosociological aspects
of plant population dynamics, studies on the nature and extent of the dependence of
local communities on forest resources and the role played by them in conservation of
forests and wildlife in tropics, rural livelihood models, various participatory
approaches including their impact and gender and equity issues in forestry systems.
The literature has been reviewed under the following broad aspects:
Phytosociology
Dependence of local communities on forests
Involvement of local communities in forest and wildlife conservation:
modalities and impact
Rural livelihood models
Gender and equity issues
Participatory approaches
Sampling methods
In phytosociology, the works of various authors have been quoted on various
issues. While reviewing the other aspects, various tools/approaches/findings of
various authors have been narrated. It was not possible to conduct review of literature
by quoting and comparing the findings/observations of various authors on different
13
issues as the issues involved were extremely diverse and complex and not much work
was found to have been done on each one to enable comparison between them.
However, wherever feasible, the same has been provided.
2.1 Phytosociology
Phytosociological concepts for studying plant associations are much older than the
word ‘ecology’ coined by Ernest Haeckel in 1866. Oosting (1956) mentioned
phytosociology as one of the major aspects of vegetation study in a community. In
general, phytosociology is defined as the study of composition, development,
geographical distribution and environmental relationships of plant communities
(Muellar-Dombois and Ellenberg 1974). The number of species and their relative
abundance give an idea about design and functioning of the communities. Total
important values occupied by the most important species are a function of the amount
of disturbance and are inverse function of species richness (Campbell, 1994). The
concept of importance value index has been developed in order to express the
dominance and ecological success of any species in single value. The index utilizes
three parameters i.e. relative frequency, relative density and relative dominance.
Forest with a tree species whose dominance is 40 or more is called single dominant
forest (Cao and Zhang, 1997).
Various workers have classified trees, saplings and seedlings for regeneration
studies according to the objective of the study and type of vegetation. Ojo and Ola-
Adams (1996) considered three categories of tree species for diversity indices, i.e.
small trees of 5-20 cm diameter at breast height (dbh), medium trees- 20 cm to 40 cm
dbh and large trees of 40 cm diameter and above. Cao and Zhang (1997) have taken
into consideration either dbh ≥ 5 cm or height ≥ 2m as trees. According to
Poffenberger et al. (1992) and Parthasarthy and Karthikeyan (1997), trees are
individual plants of ≥ 30 cm girth at breast height (gbh).
The data for phytosociological studies can be obtained from different methods
of sampling depending upon the objectives of the study, topography and type of
vegetation. Quadrat method is one of the important sampling methods for the study of
vegetation (Curtis and Cottam, 1956; Misra, 1968 and Nautial et al., 1987).
Poffenberger et al. (1992) indicated that it is important to include a control plot. This
14
allows comparison of any management practice with plots which are both 1)
unprotected open access, and 2) undisturbed natural forests. The most common
method employed for vegetation analysis is quadrat technique. Point-centered quarter
method is also described for use in highly diverse areas with randomly distributed
species. It is far easier to estimate crucial parameters such as basal area per ha. using
equations through quadrat method than point-centered quarter or any other method.
Species diversity and vegetation structure in tropical forest ecosystems in
India has been studied by several researchers (Shah et al., 1978; Shah and Bhatt,
1980; Verma and Das, 1981; Banerjee and Lal, 1985; Sharma et al., 1986; George and
Varghese, 1993). Malhotra and Moorthy (1992) and Kunhikannan (1999) conducted
vegetation studies in Tadoba National Park, Maharashtra.
Many diversity indices exist, each with its own strength and weaknesses.
Therefore it is best to use combination of them (Samson and Knopf, 1996). No single
index encompasses all the characteristics of an ideal index including high
discriminant ability, low sensitivity to sample size and ease in calculation (Magurran,
1988). Ludwig et al. (1988) have indicated that a number of indicators have been
proposed to measure species richness that are independent of the sample size. They
are based on the relationship between S (total number of species) and the total number
of individuals observed n, which increase with the increase in the sample size. Two
historically well-known richness indices are Margalef’s index and Menhinick index’.
(Magurran, 1988) has also mentioned that Margalef’s index attempts to compensate
for sampling effects.
Clark (1995) has indicated that ‘indices like Shanon-Wiener’s index, which
has the attribute of being influenced by both the number of species present and how
evenly or unevenly the individuals are distributed among the constituent species, are
sample size independent. Thus most samples of different sizes can be directly
compared’. Studies on plant diversity have been conducted by various researchers
throughout the world. Monk (1967) and Risser and Rice (1971) have calculated
diversity indices ranging from 2 to 3 for temperate forests of the new world. While
studying the vegetation ecology of Tadoba National Park, Maharashtra, Kunhikannan
reported Shannon-Wiener index of 2.4 to 2.9 for woody species, 0.6 to 2.3 for shrubs
15
and 3.9 for herbs (Kunhikannan, 1999). He has also indicated that Simpson index for
trees varies from 0.085 to 0.147 and for shrubs from 0.135 to 0.806.
Sanjit and Bhatt (2005) reported that since species richness simply denotes the
number of species, it is an un-weighted measure of species number relations. In
species diversity, species are weighted by some measure of their abundance,
productivity or size. They feel that species richness is the best tool for conservation
biologists because it de-emphasizes the many common dominant species in a
community.
2.2 Dependence of Local Communities on Forests
According to a survey carried out in mid-eighties, over two third of the protected
areas had human settlement and resource use inside them (Kothari et al., 1989). In
India, 64% of the rural population and 100 million tribals (Lynch, 1992) depend on
the forests for the sustenance. In the domestic sector in rural India, non-commercial
fuels (fuelwood, crop residues and animal wastes) meet 80-92% of the total energy
needs which the share of fuelwood ranges from 20-78% (TERI, 1998). Forests
contribute about 32% of the fuelwood requirements of the country. Against a
sustainable level of 31 million cow-units a year that might graze in forests, the actual
number is close to 100 million cow-units, more than three times the desirable limits of
carrying capacity (TERI, 1998).
Increasing dependence on forest resources may sometimes have negative
impact on livelihoods. Matenga (2002) while studying the conservation development
programmes in the protected areas in Zambia found that instead of improving the
livelihoods of the local communities, these programmes have in fact accentuated their
economic marginalization as they have ignored the development of agriculture, the
main livelihood strategy for the majority of the people in these regions.
Karanja (2003), while reporting the impact of tourism in Masai Mara National
Reserve, Kenya, reports that it provides an economic rationale for protected areas and
has a potential to generate significant benefits for conservation, local communities
and national governments. However tourism is not cost-free and uncontrolled and ill-
managed tourism can have significant negative impacts on wildlife and the
environment in the protected areas.
16
Hasler (2004) has reported that over ten years of social and ecological
monitoring and evaluation, planning effort, policy change, legislative reform, donor
support and pilot design have taken place for community based wildlife management
(CBWM) projects in Southern Africa. In the attempt to achieve those social
conditions under which CBWM can work (legislative and policy reform, capacity
building, institutional development, direct local economic benefits and enhanced
ecological value of local resources), planners, academicians and practitioners have
encouraged co-management regimes rather than community based management
regimes. The findings of this study suggest that powerful players may co-opt the
process for their own, sometimes perverse purposes and instead of the hoped for
'political ecologies of scale” occurring, where all levels of society benefit from the
promotion of 'win/win' good management practices at local level, 'a political impasse
of scale' may emerge.
The provisions of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 directly or indirectly affect the
life of 3 to 4 million indigenous and other communities living within 600 protected
areas spread across the country (Wani and Kothari, 2007). The 2005 report of Tiger
Task Force “Joining the Dots” acknowledges that the protection of tigers and forests
is inseparable from the fortunes of people inhibiting the forest areas.
2.3 Involvement of Local Communities in Forest and Wildlife
Conservation: Modalities and Impact
Colchester (1994) indicates that conservation agencies need to be made more
accountable to the indigenous people if they are to become more socially sensitive
and to cede power to local communities. He advocates that the indigenous people face
four major problems inherent in classical conservation approach. Mainstream
conservationists have put the preservation of nature above the interests of human
being. Secondly, their view of nature has been shaped by a cultural notion of
wilderness sharply at odds with the cosmovision of most indigenous people. Thirdly,
conservationists have sought authority for their regulation of human interactions with
nature in the power of the state. Lastly, conservationists’ perception of indigenous
people is tinged with the same prejudice that confronts indigenous people everywhere.
The result, as we have seen is that indigenous people have suffered a four-fold
17
marginalization due to conservationist imposition. The challenge is to find a means of
making conservation organizations accountable to what is for them the unfamiliar
constituency, indigenous people, so that they are obliged to treat, indigenous people’s
concerns with the seriousness they deserve.
Shekhar Singh (1997) mentions that ecodevelopment is a strategy that
attempts to conserve ecologically valuable areas, especially protected areas in a
manner that ensures that the negative impact of such a conservation effort on people
living in and around these PAs is minimized, empowers the local communities to have
an increasing say in the management of the protected area, creates among the local
populations a sense of ownership towards the PA and strengthens PA management
capabilities. He further indicates that ecodevelopment is unlikely to succeed if it is not
supplemented by effective management of the PA. Very often there is a need to orient
the local population in principles of wildlife management relevant to the specific PA.
Kothari (1998) has reported that India’s conservation policy and programmes
are moving increasingly towards more participatory processes. The conservation
movement should be made broad based. Some compromises may appear necessary
(by both urban conservationists and local communities) to make these new alignments
and strategies possible: some wildlife habitat may be lost; some communities may
have to give up cherished traditions. But in the long run, a range of options in which
co-management and community based conservation figure prominently, offer a much
surer vision of conservation than we have built over the last few decades.
Lele (1998) has studied the issue of jointness of the joint forest management
programme in India. He mentions that official wildlife conservation policy has
managed to reverse, to some extent, declines in wildlife populations. However, it has
until recently retained the exclusivist and alienating tendencies. The government has
responded during the last two decades with programs of joint forest management in
degraded forest areas and ecodevelopment in and around protected areas. These two
main programs have a mixed record: in some cases they have helped local people to
gain sustainable livelihoods, but both suffer from a lack of actual power-sharing with
these people, and from the same exclusionary focus that characterized conventional
policies. Several NGOs, community representatives, and some officials are
advocating joint management strategies for wildlife reserves, but this has yet to gain
18
formal acceptance. Recent legal measures, especially the devolution of powers to
village-level institutions, have boosted such advocacy. Communities need a strong
stake in conserving the local ecosystems and species. This is more often than not
likely to be economic or livelihood-based, but it could also be social recognition,
political empowerment, and cultural sustenance. Tenurial security over natural
resources essential for survival and basic livelihoods is most important. This means
that in most cases there is a need to integrate conservation values and imperatives
with livelihood requirements. This is by no means easy, and may call for some give-
and-take, but in the long run such integration is critical for both conservation and for
social justice.
Pabla and Mathur (1998) have reported that the strife between PAs and local
people is a reality and is a major bottleneck in conservation. Although we need to
reduce human density in and around PAs, it is possible for man and wildlife to co-
exist in other areas, with some trade-off. Any delay in winning the popular support for
conservation will bring the doom of many known, and many more unknown, forms of
life that much closer.
Ravindranath et al. (1998) conducted baseline studies to gain a preliminary
understanding of the existing institutional arrangements, vegetation status, current
firewood and NTFP extraction practices and income regeneration from protected and
managed forests under community and joint forest management systems. A total of 27
villages were studied which included 16 JFM and 11CFMs systems in 8 states
including Western Ghats in Karnataka. Assessment of institutional arrangement
regarding structure, functioning, regulations and effectiveness of management system
was carried out. Parameters such as vegetation regeneration, biodiversity, size
distribution of tree species and growing stock of protected forest were studied to
understand the impact of the various management systems on the vegetation status.
Degradation of forests and shortage of biomass was found to be the dominant
motivating factor for protection and management of forests in all the locations. All
socio-economic groups including the large and small farmers and the landless
depended on forests for firewood. It was noticed that longer the period of protection,
higher the species diversity and trees of larger DBH. Field studies showed that a
variety of NTFPs are extracted. A number of NTFPs were available but not extracted
19
in few locations as the Western Ghats. It was suggested that long-term monitoring
studies are required to assess the yields and impacts of NTFP extraction practices.
Given the large diversity of locations, with socio-economic and ecological variations,
the only feasible option is to enable village communities or village forest committee
members or village teachers and students to monitor the status of vegetation, develop
and adopt practices, and monitor their impacts and accordingly modify them which
could be termed as adaptive forest management.
Sudha et al. (1998) conducted a study in the community-managed forests of
Shimoga district in the Western Ghats region of Karnataka to investigate the
community-managed systems that have evolved in the past few decades. The existing
community management systems were wholly initiated by local communities in
response to degradation leading to biomass scarcity. Though there is no conscious
discrimination, there is no representation of the economically poorer sections or
socially backward households in the protection committee. Women are excluded from
the committees as well as meetings although women participate in protection and are
the major extractors of biomass. The control plots have fewer tree species as
compared to the protected forest and it is almost less than half the number found in
the protected forests. All communities have evolved very strict rules for extraction of
biomass. The communities realized that extraction rates in the pre-protection period
were non-sustainable and therefore stringent measures of protection are needed.
Karlsson (1999), while studying the ecodevelopment practices in Buxa Tiger
Reserve, West Bengal, has mentioned that during the early 1990s, experiments in
‘ecodevelopment’ were carried out in widespread critique of western industrial
society. Beside the main concern for the environment or for ‘ecological limits to
growth’, issues of increased local control and popular involvement in the development
process have also been central.
Kothari et al. (2000) have conducted regional review of community wildlife
management in South Asia. Impacts are gauged at four levels: ecological, economic &
livelihood, social/political and policy. It is suggested that there is ‘overwhelming
evidence’ to indicate positive ecological impacts due to CWM in the region and in
addition it has ‘helped to enhance the livelihood security of communities’. Enabling
policies and developmental inputs has supported this. In many CWM sites in India,
20
communities were found to have taken back virtual control over the surrounding
natural resources, and many indirect as well as direct benefits have been seen. The
study also indicates a large number of constraints and challenges to the development
of CWM including the difficulty of identifying key stakeholders, social differences
between and within communities, insecure tenure and unclear rights to resources,
weak mechanisms for ensuring ecological sustainability, a poor balance between costs
and benefits, inadequate or inappropriate institutions and a hostile political and
economic environment. It is suggested that many communities involved in CWM do
not seem to want ‘absolute ownership’, but more of a custodianship/trusteeship
arrangement, with controls and responsibility being wedded together. Access/rights to
benefits have to go hand in hand with responsibilities to ensure that conservation is
achieved. One issue that clearly emerges in many CWM initiatives is the need to build
capacity of communities to optimize and achieve their equal distribution.
The India Ecodevelopment Project (IEP), supported from the Global
Environmental Facility (GEF) and International Development Aid (IDA) funds of The
World Bank is a major initiative to promote the conservation of biological diversity
through the implementation of the ecodevelopment strategies around select Protected
Areas (PAs) in India (World Bank 1996). Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
was applied as an environmental appraisal tool for the evaluation of proposed
investment under IEP.
Rajvanshi (2001) has discussed the lessons learnt from the application of SEA
to IEP in Gir National Park and Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve. SEA led to the
identification of the impact potential of some of the activities proposed under IEP.
Accordingly, appropriate strategies and feasible alternatives have been suggested for
reducing undesirable changes in the ecological, economic and social fabric of the two
PAs' environment. The SEA has been undoubtedly recognized as a powerful means to
steer the IEP along environmentally sustainable path.
Case studies were undertaken under Evaluating Eden project of International
Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) to provide a global perspective on
the impacts and achievements of community-based wildlife management (CWM) for
the regulated use of wildlife populations and ecosystems by local stakeholders (Roe
and Jack, 2001). The status of CWM was studied in eight regions: West Africa,
21
Central Africa, East Africa, Southern Africa, South Asia, South East Asia, Central
America and South America. To ensure long-term conservation of the Kilum-Ijim
forests in Cameroon, while improving local livelihoods in ways compatible with
maintaining the forest, the Kilum-Ijim Forest Project established a community-based
management system for the conservation and sustainable use of the forest. The Project
showed that the establishment of community forests is a journey in developing
capacity amongst government, traditional and community-based institutions to work
together towards more participatory forms of management, with a more equitable
distribution of rights and responsibilities.
In Southern Africa, a variety of factors have played a key role in shifting
conservation policy and practice away from state-controlled protectionism and
towards CWM. The model that has emerged entails allowing communities access to
natural resources from which they previously had been barred, sharing revenue from
the use of natural resources (through a variety of consumptive or non-consumptive
uses) with communities and making conservation pay for costs of wildlife
management as well as community development programmes.
Zimbabwe’s Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous
Resources (CAMPFIRE) has been a critically important learning experience. The
basic assumption of CAMPFIRE is that in arid or semi-arid areas, land use involving
cropping and/or cattle grazing may cause environmental problems, such as
deforestation and erosion, and economic difficulties, such as low yields and lack of
development. If these land-use strategies are combined with community management
of wildlife, greater environmental, economic and sustainable rewards ensue. The
greatest achievement of CAMPFIRE has been the broad scale of implementation of
the project. The CAMPFIRE movement indicates that the devolution of legal rights
and management functions to local (village) level is essential in order to foster the
sustainable management of wildlife by people affected by wildlife.
State-led conservation policies in South Asia, focusing on legal enforcement
and the declaration of supposedly human-free protected areas, have helped to a
limited extent to stem this rot, but have created further problems of alienation
amongst local populations. Though well under way, CWM in South Asia continues to
face serious hurdles. These include resistance from entrenched bureaucracies (such
22
that even in the famous Joint Forest Management programme in India, true sharing of
powers is rare), reduced capacity in communities to manage natural resources,
inequities in decision-making and benefit-sharing at all levels, destructive economic
and developmental policies, and difficulties in creating livelihood security for
communities.
The paper by Murali et al. (2002a) introduces a range of methods used for data
gathering and the results of their analysis in the evaluation of JFM initiatives in India.
They collected 200 evaluation reports from different states, of which 99 reported on
methods used, and issues addressed in socio-economic, institutional, ecological and
gender and training aspects. There were 33 reports addressing the socio-economic
issues while only 15 reports addressed ecological issues. There were only 4 reports
that addressed training needs, while 12 related to gender issues. There were no reports
that focused on monitoring of JFM. The paper indicated that it was not clear how
many took the mid-term evaluation seriously and what review process was adopted to
improve their future implementation process.
Murali et al. (2002b) assessed the ecological impact of JFM in India using
studies undertaken at national, state and forest division levels. It was found that there
are very few studies that have specifically addressed the ecological aspects under
JFM. How much of JFM area has developed into good forests is not known. The
study found that biomass growth rate was comparatively higher in JFM forests as
compared to national average. The study noted that effectiveness of support
programmes is not clearly known in terms of its functioning and biomass saved.
In a study conducted by Murthy et al. (2002), five villages undertaking joint
forest management (JFM) were chosen in Uttara Kannada district, Karnataka for
assessing regeneration in plantations and nearby natural forests of the village. Stem
density was low in all the disturbed forests. The species number was low in disturbed
forests of three villages and high in two villages. Plantations showed lower diversity
values compared to the adjacent natural forests. Regeneration in all less disturbed
forests was better compared to the disturbed counterparts. Assessment of village
forests using ranks indicates that parameters such as per capita availability, cut stems
in the forests may determine the success of JFM. Four villages show low species
diversity in disturbed forests compared to the less-disturbed forests. The species that
23
are regenerating are mostly of deciduous type, which may require open canopy. They
concluded that species of evergreen type may fail to regenerate in plantations though
the natural forest is close to plantations, indicating high specificity of regeneration
niche.
Ravindranath et al. (2002) reported that no national level evaluation of JFM
has taken place. The regional evaluation studies are handicapped by absence of
baseline or benchmark information on vegetation status, economic benefit flows and
institutional capacity prior to JFM initiation. Most of the studies do not even seem to
overcome this limitation by selecting control villages or control vegetation plots and
conducting comparative studies. In many locations, micro-plans were jointly prepared
bur not used during implementation and routine afforestation techniques were
adopted. The capacity building programmes did not involve the village communities
in any significant scale and they were not sustained. In most states the representation
of women was restricted to the quota stipulated in the JFM orders. In a few locations
such as in Western Ghats of Karnataka, there are all women VFCs. Majority of the
studies suggest that women do not participate in the meetings and even when they
attend the meetings, male members dominate the decision-making. Women do not
have access to information and are not adequately trained or empowered. Studies have
suggested that VFCs/FPCs have performed better where NGOs have played an active
role.
Woodman (2002) addresses the processes by which ecodevelopment concepts
are transmitted from planning to implementation and the factors that intervene in this
process, focusing on the India Ecodevelopment Project (IEP) in Pench Tiger Reserve,
Central India. Villagers relate to the SFDs as entities that have power over their lives
and simultaneously have negotiated relations with individual agents within the SFDs.
Such relations, on both levels, have historically deep roots and are difficult and slow
to change yet impact greatly on the implementation of the project. Rather than
ignoring such factors and relationships, projects would benefit from analysis of these
ghosts which shape the understudied processes underlying implementation. In this
case study, the antecedent conditions for the Project were not conducive because of a
lack of experience of such projects and a lack of trust between the parties. The
groundwork needed for the required participatory mechanisms and relationship
24
changes was still in its infancy as the Project drew to a close. Transmission of the
project ideas, ethos and methodology was severely limited, partially due to a lack of
effective mechanisms for concept transmission and partially due to elements of both
villagers and SFDs still being shackled by hegemonic power relations and resistance
to change. He concluded by inferring that in practice, rather than ‘ghosts’ interfering
in the project, it is more useful to perceive the project as a blip in the ongoing
negotiation of relations between foresters and people, which may or may not act as a
catalyst for more sustained changes and the development of locally appropriate
solutions.
Kothari (2003) has suggested that to secure effective and active participation
of the communities, programs must be able to restore the local institutions that are
important for the environmental entitlements of various societal sections. It is
important to acknowledge that resource priorities and requirements differ among the
various sections within a community. The main partners in conservation, the local
communities and the field staff need to be empowered through training and capacity-
building programs. Flexibility in terms of time and fund allocation is needed at the
planning stage itself.
Sinha (2003) has reported that community based forest management in India
has emerged mainly in three forms-indigenous community forest management, crafted
community forest management and joint forest management. These three types vary
in composition, institutional rules, functioning of managing committee, modes of
resolving the conflicts, and leadership pattern. The study indicates that social identity
and participation were significantly higher in indigenous community forest
management than the joint forest management. Homogeneous community units under
participatory leadership had more social identity and people's participation. Members
of indigenous and crafted community forest management had higher satisfaction with
its institutional rules, managing committee's functioning, and leadership pattern than
joint forest management.
Ravindranath and Sudha (2004) have reported that the vegetation status under
JFM has improved considerably in the country compared to pre-JFM days, although
the impact on biodiversity has not been pronounced. JFM has fostered a better
relationship between the community and the Forest Department in all the states, with
25
about 95% of the JFMCs in the study area reporting an improved relationship.
Enhancement in the leadership qualities in the community was noticed in selected
states. The empowerment of women was perceived largely in tribal dominated areas,
although not to the desirable extent at the state level. Women were active in those
JFMCs that had functioning and effective SHGs. There has been a reduction in the
illegal extraction of timber and fuel wood due to the protection measures adopted by
the community.
2.4 Rural Livelihood Models
Ecodocumentation workshop held at Wildlife Institute of India (WII, 1998) suggested
that in order to overcome the threats to biodiversity conservation in general and to
PAs in particular that are not necessarily coming from the livelihood dependencies of
communities (like change of land use in PA surrounds and other activities that are
detrimental to PA conservation etc.), one needs to move towards larger landscape
level planning that integrates PAs into regional development plans. The participants
felt that ecodevelopment should learn from initiatives outside PAs, including Joint
Forest Management, community initiated forest protection, traditional sustainable
resource use practices, etc. Livelihood strategies based on off-farm income generation
options have shown lesser success than the ones that are based on land and water
resources. It is also felt that a majority of the livelihood strategies tried so far have
been too preoccupied with alternative to the forest based resources use rather than
bringing such resource under participatory management based on well defined
regulations and principles of sustainability. This was supported by the fact that NTFP
based enterprises developed under collaborative partnership have shown encouraging
results. For alleviating pressure from the protected areas, the productivity of land and
water resources needs to be enhanced, whether these are forests, private land,
panchayat lands or wastelands. Mutually beneficial linkages between economic and
ecological concerns need to be built in.
Department for International Development, UK (1999) deals exhaustively
with rural livelihood issues in its sustainable livelihoods framework. It mentions that a
livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets and activities required for a means of
living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses
26
and shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both in present and in
the future, while not undermining the natural resource base. The sustainable
livelihoods framework presents the main factors that affect people’s livelihoods, and
typical relationships between these. The framework provides a checklist of important
issues and sketches out the way these link to each other; draws attention to core
influences and processes and emphasizes the multiple interactions between the
various factors which affect livelihoods.
The livelihood framework identifies five core asset categories of capital upon
which livelihoods are built. The categories are human capital, social capital, natural
capital, physical capital and financial capital. Human capital represents the skills,
knowledge, ability to labour and good health that together enable people to pursue
different livelihood strategies and achieve their livelihood objectives. Social capital
means the social resources upon which people draw in pursuit of their livelihood
objectives. Most attempts to build social capital focus on strengthening local
institutions. Natural capital is the term used for the natural resource stocks from which
resource flows and services (e.g. nutrient cycling, erosion protection) useful for
livelihoods are derived. Physical capital comprises the basic infrastructure and
producer goods needed to support livelihoods. Financial capital denotes the financial
resources that people use to achieve their livelihood objectives. The issue of
institutional sustainability is of particularly importance in the area of micro-finance.
The livelihoods approach seeks to promote choice, opportunity and diversity.
The sustainable livelihoods approach seeks to develop an understanding of the factors
that lie behind people’s choice of livelihood strategy and then to reinforce the positive
aspects (factors which promote choice and flexibility) and mitigate the constraints or
negative influences.
While the resource dependency of local communities can be met by
rationalizing the resource utilization, improving biomass use efficiency and promoting
use of substitutes, the economic dependency can be reduced by providing alternate
livelihood options. Learning from the past experience of implementation of
ecodevelopment schemes from biodiversity conservation in various PAs suggests that
we have enough scope for meeting the resource demands of the local people using the
available appropriate technology and suitable extension methods. However, more
27
information and suitable expertise are required to involve and design sustainable
livelihood for them (WII, 2002).
Durst et al. (2005) have reported that the management of Periyar Tiger
Reserve created various alternative livelihood options aimed at taking pressure off the
reserve and promoting forest conservation. A group of convicted smugglers was
transformed into stewards of conservation. This almost magical transformation was
brought about by ecodevelopment committees that were formed to establish and
support eco-tourism related enterprises and forest protection businesses.
Wani and Kothari (2007) studied the impact of India’s conservation policies
on the livelihoods of communities living in the PAs. The cause of their poverty and
the extent to which it was possible through conservation policy initiatives to secure
livelihoods was studied. The study showed that the poverty has been perpetuated due
to exclusionary conservation model, inadequate or non-settlement of rights,
inadequate rehabilitation, inadequate developmental activities and non-participation
of affected people in planning and decision-making process.
Pandey (2008) has documented the efforts made at Great Himalayan National
Park (GHNP) to address the imbalances in resource creation, distribution and
allocation of accountability of all the stakeholders. The recent efforts to conserve the
biodiversity at GHNP aim at innovative strategies and action plans involving
participatory approaches with emphasis on equitable and sustainable use of natural
resources by the local people. The management plan of GHNP is based on the
livelihood approach which prioritizes working with local communities to reduce their
dependence on the PA’s natural resources. Efforts were made at settlement of rights
of local people and creation of income-generating activities in adjacent villages to
compensate for the lost income from collection of medicinal plants and other forest
produce within the Park.
2.5 Gender and Equity Issues
O’Sullivan (1991) suggested rapid social assessment (RSA) to clearly identify women
target groups and to predict the potential need or demand of different sub-populations
for a proposed project, given their level of development and absorptive capacity. The
RSA approach consists of five steps: identification of the target sub-populations,
28
rating the level of development of each sub-population, assessing the target
populations need or demand for the project, assessing their absorptive capacity and
assessing their relationships. The results of RSA may then be used to reassess the
appropriateness of project goals and purposes from the perspective of women, and to
undertake participatory project design (PPD) phase to maximize participants and
positive impact on women.
Poffenberger et al. (1996) have mentioned that in India, women are often the
primary forest-user group and without their formal involvement in management,
agreements over sustainable use, access controls and strategic development will be
incomplete and probably, not optimally effective. Legislation has failed to establish
full gender equality in law, much less in practice. The economic, class and caste
variations in the position of Indian women as a subgroup need better documentation
and analysis as do women’s daily needs and role vis-à-vis forest use.
Flintan (2003) has reported that differences and inequalities exist between men
and women in all sections of society and communities in Asia. Culture, ethnicity,
caste and religion play a dominant part in cultivating such differences. In majority of
cases, inequalities result in a bias against women. Women, particularly poor rural
women, play a dominant role in natural resource collection, and are often highly
dependent upon it for fulfilling household needs and livelihood security. Despite this,
women still have very little involvement in decision-making processes including those
that have been set up for natural resource management. There is a lack of organized
platform for women to express their needs and views, and from which to address
gender issues.
In a study related to joint forest management in India conducted by
Ravindranath and Sudha (2004), it was found that the empowerment of women was
perceived largely in tribal dominated areas, though not to the desirable extent at the
state level. Women were active in JFMC’s, which had functioning and effective self-
help groups. To enhance women’s participation, it has been suggested that local
women representatives of NGO’s and SHG’s should equip women management
committee members with leadership qualities. Dedicated meetings to address
problems faced by women must be held.
29
Pandey (2008) has narrated his experiences at GHNP in empowering women.
Acknowledging that village forest development committees are mostly male
dominated, realizing that poverty is the main opponent of conservation and
recognizing that the women are the poorest of the poor, efforts were made to organize
womenfolk into small Woman Savings and Credit Groups (WSCGs). These group
members save their own money (one rupee a day) and earn credit within the WSCG to
invest in natural resource-based enterprise development. Their capacity building was
done through select women group organizers. The group size was kept small (about
10-15) and of homogeneous nature. WSCGs have now organized themselves into a
registered body called SAHARA (Society for Scientific Advancement of Hill and
Rural Areas). The Park provides most of the wage-oriented work to the women
groups on priority basis.
2.6 Participatory Approaches
While suggesting guidelines for reviewing ecodevelopment investments in Great
Himalayan National Park, Pabla (1996) mentions that ecodevelopment investments
would generally of two types-those which contribute towards mitigation of pressures
on natural resources directly and those related to infrastructure development which
may or may not have an indirect impact on the consumption of bio-resources.
Experience shows that while the first category of investments is the main agenda of
forest departments, people generally are keener on the second category. Every micro-
plan would be a mix of the two kinds of investments having domination of
conservation-oriented activities. If the investment is for community development,
people should share the cost in cash or kind and if the investment is for individual
income, the beneficiary should share either the cost or pay part of the income into a
social fund. Any investments proposed under ecodevelopment must be capable of
generating resources for their sustainability. The Government or any other helping
agency must withdraw after the programme takes off.
Poffenberger et al. (1996) has indicated that community resource initiatives
are not dependent upon, nor designed to absorb, large amount of capital for
employment schemes or technical inputs. Rather its success is based on reducing
conflicts, opening communications, and counting on voluntary community protection
30
to enhance low or no-cost secondary forest succession. It may be more prudent for
donors and government to finance small-scale training, extension and research
projects, thereby allowing both themselves and state agencies to learn more about
strategies that support community forest management groups.
The assumption that there can be meaningful local participation and decision
making, when the project is driven by enormous level of funding, at the international
and national level, is invalid. The approach is not economically viable, in that it
demands enormous resources for small areas, although most of the problems cover
enormous areas (Anonymous, 1997b).
Badola (1999) has reported that the Forest Department, hierarchical and
almost non-participatory in its decision-making processes, has difficulty practicing
what it has only recently begun to preach. Ecodevelopment has expanded the duties of
forestry staff, but staff capabilities have remained unchanged. Because of the remote
areas and difficult conditions, wildlife management does not attract the best staff, and
field staff may have difficulty in maintaining their commitment.
Badola (2000), while reporting the lessons learnt in ecodevelopment, reported
that the local communities and the field staff need to be empowered through training
and capacity building programmes. Local people need to receive tangible benefits
even in the short run. To secure effective and active participation of the communities,
programmes must be able to restore the local institutions that are important for the
environmental entitlements of various societal sections. Conservation and
development issues are not only technical or economic in nature but also political. To
achieve all this requires a firm political will.
Saberwal et al. (2001) have mentioned that exclusionary conservation is
simply too rigid and too simplistic to deal with the diversity of situations in India.
Conservation must be adopted on case to case basis, with the flexibility available to
land managers to experiment with a variety of model, including joint management,
limited harvesting of forest products, the provision for better incentives and a greater
share of tourism revenue.
31
2.7 Sampling Methods
Various researchers have tried to standardize the size of layers used for the
study of different types of vegetation. The minimum size may vary according to the
objectives of the study and type of vegetation. Nautial et al., (1987) suggested the
quadrat size for deciduous forests as 400-900 sq. m. for trees, 9-25 sq. m. for shrubs
and 0.25-1 sq. m. for herbs and regeneration while studying the vegetation of south
Raipur, Chattisgarh.
It is pertinent to mention that there is no standard methodology prescribed for
sample size or sampling intensity and Ravindranath et al. (2000) have indicated that
in view of limitation of time and resources, different quadrat sizes and replicates have
been taken. Mishra et al. (2004) have reported that ‘while studying the effect of
anthropogenic disturbance on plant diversity and community structure of sacred grove
in Meghalaya, three patches representing undisturbed (15 ha), moderately disturbed
(15 ha) and highly disturbed (10 ha) forest stands were demarcated. About 1% area of
each (0.15 ha each of the undisturbed and moderately disturbed, and 0.1 ha of highly
disturbed stand) was sampled by laying quadrats randomly. Species richness (number
of species per 100 m2 was then ascertained in the three types of areas’. Anitha et al.
(2009) have reported that the study forest area in Western Ghats was divided into 17
plots of high disturbance category and 23 plots of low disturbance category based on
cluster analysis and species richness, density, average basal area and Shannon index
were calculated and compared. Ewell and Nichols (1985), while reporting prescribed
fire monitoring in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park, USA, have mentioned
that ‘before the fire, at least four plots are set up on the area to be burnt and one
control plot is set up outside the burn area’. Louis A. Toth (2007) reported that while
studying torpedo grass control methods in Florida, treatment 1 had three replicate
plots, treatments 3 and 4 had five replicates, treatments 2 and 5 had two replicates,
and only one plot remained as a control. Parthasarathy et al. (2004) have studied the
patterns of liana diversity in 5 selected sites in tropical evergreen forests of peninsular
India. One hectare area sample plots were laid at 4 out of these 5 sites. The number of
sample plots was 4 at first site, 3 at second site, 2 at third site and 8 at fourth site. The
fifth site comprised of one single sample plot of 30 ha for which mean per hectare was
32
calculated. Species richness, species density and species diversity was calculated and
compared for each plot and also across study sites.
For joint forest management systems, Poffenberger et al. (1992) have
advocated a quadrat size of 50 m x 20 m for trees and 5 m x 5 m for shrubs and
seedlings for vegetation studies. They included woody plants with less than 30 cm
GBH as shrubs and seedlings and suggested two shrubs and seedlings quadrats in
each tree quadrats. They have indicated that keeping in view the limitations on
investigator’s time and resources, 5 to 8 tree quadrats and 10 to 16 shrubs and
seedlings quadrats may be taken for vegetation studies.
A review of 100 Monitoring and Evaluation studies on JFM in India at
national, state and JFMC level indicates that no standard Monitoring and Evaluation
strategies were developed or executed and the issues addressed in the evaluation
studies were mostly institutional and there were no reports addressing ecological,
silvicultural and economic issues (Ravindranath, and Sudha, 2004 pp 282). Hardly
any systematic studies have been conducted in our country to study the impact of
ecodevelopment.
The study employs a perception analysis to assess the socio-economic impacts
of ecodevelopment in the study villages over a period of time as perceived by the
stakeholders. Perception analysis is an important tool to know the past and current
positions related to particular factors (Pandey, 2005). Perception analysis has been
extensively used in studies assessing the impact of JFM on rural livelihoods. The
survey technique involves developing a questionnaire, field testing and using it during
household surveys (Ravindranath and Sudha, 2004 pp 289).
There are various evaluation studies conducted by Planning Commission and
other agencies which have selected study areas/ villages on the basis of highest
expenditure, highest targets or highest number of schemes implemented. Some of the
studies are referred below:
Programme Evaluation Organisation (PEO) of Planning Commission, in its
Evaluation Report on Western Ghats Development Programme-1982, mentioned that
a criterion for selection of sample followed was that first 10 districts where
comparatively larger number of Schemes had been in operation were selected for the
study. 2 talukas were then selected from each chosen district on the basis of the
33
maximum number of schemes in operation. Within the selected talukas, lists of the
work sites/projects were prepared separately for each selected sectoral scheme in
descending order of the expenditure incurred on each work site/project. Those
projects accounting for the highest expenditure to their credit were selected from each
of the schemes (Planning Commission- PEO Study No. 121).
Programme Evaluation Organisation (PEO) of Planning Commission, in its
‘Evaluation Report on High Yielding Varieties Programme in India (1970-75) - Part-
II – 1976’, mentioned that a criterion for selection of sample followed was that in
each selected district, blocks with the highest and the second-highest targets were
chosen for the study (Planning Commission- PEO Study No. 91).
PEO of Planning Commission, in its ‘Field Reporting on the Working of
Social Welfare Schemes – 1970’, selected one block from each district with the
maximum number of Social Welfare Schemes in operation (Planning Commission-
PEO Study No. 81).
Programme Evaluation Organisation (PEO) of Planning Commission, in its
‘Study of Crash Scheme for Rural Employment (1971-74) – 1979’, indicated that the
broad criteria adopted for selection were the expenditure incurred and employment
generated (Planning Commission-PEO Study No.104).
PEO in its ‘Evaluation Report on Social Forestry Programme, 1987’
mentioned that one of the objectives of the programme was to study the economic and
ecological impact on the local population, particularly the rural poor. The study was
conducted at five levels namely (a) Forest Division, (b) Range, (c) Village, (d)
Beneficiaries and (e) Nursery. The criterion for selection at all levels was the absolute
number of seedlings distributed through all sources. 32 Forest Divisions were selected
on the basis of highest achievement in terms of seedlings distributed during the
reference year. Similarly, 63 Nurseries were selected for the study on the basis of
maximum number of seedlings distributed by them (Planning Commission-PEO
Study No.140).
In 1982, the Programme Evaluation Organisation of the Planning Commission
of India undertook an ‘Evaluation Study of the Working of the Antyodaya Programme
in Rajasthan’. Two villages were selected from each block on the basis of the
maximum number of benefit schemes provided and the accessibility of villages. From
34
each village, a minimum of 5 beneficiaries were selected (Planning Commission PEO
Study No. 125).
Pandey (2005) has reported that ‘to study and design livelihoods monitoring
tools, it was useful to select the villages where a diversity of JFM activities have been
carried out.
Rayapa Reddy (1986) indicated in his thesis entitled ‘A study on selected
personal socio-psychological characteristics and organizational factors influencing the
productivity of village extension officers in T & V system of Andhra Pradesh’ that
one district each from four regions of AP was selected based on the criteria of highest
area covered under T & V system.
The number of respondents selected for the study in terms of absolute numbers
as well as percentage is found to vary in various studies. Though the number will
depend on the objectives of the study, availability of the respondents, time availability
etc, a sample size of 10% of the beneficiaries is generally considered adequate for this
kind of study. Researchers like Rishi et al. (2007) and Jagannadha et al. (2006) have
taken a sample size of 10% of the participating households. In some studies, the
sample size taken is much smaller. While conducting the socio-economic analysis of
agroforestry in seven districts of Vidarbha, Ingle et al. (1992) have taken 50 farmers
from 36 villages growing Eucalyptus and 35 farmers from 14 villages growing Teak.
Programme Evaluation Organisation (PEO) of Planning Commission, in its
‘Evaluation Report on Integrated Tribal Development Projects’, one of the objectives
of which was to assess the impact of selected programmes on the socio-economic
conditions of the scheduled tribes, selected a minimum of 10 and maximum of 15
tribal households from each selected village (Planning Commission- PEO Study No.
136).
PEO of Planning Commission, in its ‘Evaluation Report on Resettlement
Programme for Landless Agricultural Labourers - Case Studies of Selected Colonies,
1968’, has reported that for the selection of settler respondents in each selected
colony, the sampling fraction was so fixed as to select about 25 to 30 respondents and
where there were 2 colonies or more, the said fraction was fixed to provide an overall
sample of 50 to 60 families (Planning Commission- PEO Study No. 67).
35
Bhandari and Grant (2007) conducted a study on user satisfaction and
sustainability of drinking water schemes (DWS) in rural communities of Nepal. The
study was conducted in two geographical categories of rural water supply systems:
village and rural market centre. A sample size of 88 respondents (11%) was selected
from a total of 771 market-centre benefited households in 6 market centres. The
sample size varied from 7 households in one centre to 25 households in another centre
with a total sample size of 11% in the rural market centres. In the 6 selected rural
villages, the sample size varied from 14 to 28 households with a total of 117
households being selected out of 1327 benefited households (9%). The grand total of
the sample households for the study in the two categories was 105 (10%) out of 2098
benefited households. This sampling size gave a level of confidence of 95%.
Fisher and Yates (1953) have provided random number tables for the purpose
of randomization of data sub-set to ensure that all the possible alternatives have an
equal chance of occurring.