0676-C1
P.N. Mishra[1]
Joint Forest Management (JFM) is being increasingly suggested as a solution to conservation problems of forests in India and developing countries. Philosophically the concept is ideal and needs to be supported without reservation. However, while implementing the JFM programme in different Indian states, problems with the institutionalization of the programme have been observed. It is therefore important to analyse the details of programme and its viability in a shrinking resource base scenario. The JFM programme often finds success in support from non-forestry incentives. In this context, it is important to set up a clear research agenda to make the programme self-sustaining and viable and to institutionalize the same.
Participatory forest management initiated in Madhya Pradesh has a better chance of success if it is in tune with the sociocultural needs of local communities. The programme, which begins with restoration of forests on degraded sites, can further develop into joint management of natural resources in important watersheds. Site-specific and transparent extension strategies would motivate communities in self-governance towards sustainable development.
The paper traces the history and analyses the bottlenecks of JFM and attempts to set up a research agenda as a foundation for a well-based research programme that would make JFM a success. Research is necessary to induce continuity of flow of benefits and enhance the level of benefits available to generate sustained enthusiasm and ensure viability of the programme on a long-term basis.
This paper reviews the macro-forest management context in Madhya Pradesh. It highlights common management problems that can be addressed through diagnostic research and outlines the steps in preparing for community forestry research. It also describes the four major components of an integrated Rapid Rural Appraisal Strategy for helping develop community forest management programmes.
These include:
1) Community profiling techniques using participatory rural appraisal (PRA);
2) Methods and analysis procedures for understanding patterns of vegetative change;
3) Approaches for illuminating sociopolitical and institutional characteristics affecting resource management; and
4) Assessments of the economics of forest production system.
This paper also reviews various case studies made by the candidate with the help of the local forest officers during his stay at Narsinghpur and Balaghat districts of Madhya Pradesh.
The basic object of investigation is the process of JFM and its strengths and weaknesses in Madhya Pradesh.
This study will help to provide an initial understanding of forest use practices and conditions, while opening a dialogue with community members regarding management problems and opportunities.
India's forest management policies have been at the centre of an ongoing debate on the environment. Concern for the State of India!s forests arises from the increasing awareness that forests are:
- Essential for sustainable development, be it agricultural or industrial,
- The life-line for over 56 million tribal people inhabiting India,
-The repository of the nation's valuable natural resources, including genetic diversity.
Twenty three per cent of India!s 328 million ha ie., 75.18 million ha geographical area is classified as legal forests. However, according to estimates of Forest Survey of India (FSI) only 19.44% i.e., 64.06 million ha is under Forest tree cover. This includes area outside legal forests too. Other estimates, put effective tree clad forest area only at 50% of legal forests. Though the report 'State of Forest - 1991' published by FSI indicates a positive trend, yet the same is not considered assuring enough and anxiety is felt on the basis of past trends, as to state of forests.
Local needs have traditionally been the first charge on the forests. The legal process for reservation of forests provides for codification of rights and privileges of local people. The forest manuals of various States document the rights and privileges of people in different forest areas of the State. Enjoyment of these rights and privileges was also associated with responsibilities and duties towards forests. Assistance extinguishing fires and apprehending forest offenders invariably found mention as an obligation of the local people.
However, with the passage of time, the close linkage between the Forest Departments and the local inhabitants has been affected by the enhanced pace of life, requiring greater effort in fight for survival as also the arrival of mutiferous agencies for a variety of development works. In the changing scenario the local inhabitants started attaching greater importance to benefits perceived from welfare programmes. The normal flow of benefit from forests was increasingly considered natural and rightful with no associated obligations.
Over the last several decades the human and cattle population has increased manifold. The opening up of the hitherto inaccessible forest areas, through a network of all weather roads has led to increased traffic and the urban ways of living have ingressed into tribal areas, along with antisocial elements, who have found a treasure in the forest & The effect of enhanced population and increasing needs of local populace multiplied manifold as a consequence.
The forests are no longer inaccessible hinter lands where only effort needed is regulation of harvesting. Consequently, policing became much more important The era immediately preceding independence, and the early part of post independence period, therefore, emphasized on policing of forests, with control measures being reinforced during the process. These measures could provide only local solutions in the short term. Moreover, the local population distanced themselves from the Forest Department, which assumed the role of a policing force. The degradation of forests led to a vicious cycle of low yields and greater demands, resulting in unsatiated local needs for forest products. Local people became offenders and abettors rather than associates of the Forest Departments in protection and development of forests.
During late sixties and early seventies the foresters realised the futility of policing approach and need of social inputs. It was increasingly realised that, on one hand the forest frontiers need to be extended outside legal forests and, on the other, there was a need for active participation of local people in protection of forests and revitalisatibn of old links. A variety of welfare programmes were initiated in different parts of the country by enthused foresters, those worth mentioning at Arabari in West Bengal, South Gujarat & Madhyapradesh. The Arabari effort provided for participation of local people in protection of forests, with enhanced benefits such as a share in the revenue for forests. The efforts in South Gujarat & Madhyapradesh were mainly in the form of welfare programmes like Grain banks and the Kotwalia scheme which aimed at establishing rapport with the tribals. These were followed by initiation of a social security programme and planting on private lands. The emphasis clearly was on winning the confidence of people, reestablishment of old ties and enlisting support of local masses in the protection effort. Other States too followed suit and initiated a number of different programmes aiming for the same. The programmes failed to institutionalise occasionally due to lack of emphasis by the successors, political interference and reasons beyond control of local forest staff. The efforts were also taken up by a growing body of NGOs, which were not tied down to Governmental bureaucracy, and their efforts bore fruit.
Government of India in 1988, came out with a new National Forest Policy calling for discontinuation of commercial exploitation of forests for/by industries, and for their maintenance for conservation of soil and environment, and to meet the subsistence requirements of local people. The focus thus shifted from commerce and investment, to ecology and satiation of minimum needs of people, and strengthening the tribal forests linkages.
The policy contains the specific statement-
"The holders of customary rights and concessions in forest areas should be motivated to identify themselves with the protection and development of forests from which they derive benefits. The rights and concessions from forests should primarily be for the bonafide use of the communities living within an around forest areas, specially the tribals".
The need to meet the local needs is restated in the National Forest Policy, 1988 in the para 4.3.
"The life of tribals and other poor living within and near forests revolves around forests. The rights and concessions enjoyed by them should be fully protected. Their domestic requirements of fuelwood, fodder, minor forest produce and construction timber should be the first charge on forest produce. These and substitute materials should be made available through conveniently located depots at reasonable prices".
Participatory Forest Management is thus a programme essentially to induct villagers formally into the forest management system, and to make the production system more responsive to community needs, thereby ensuring sustainance of the resource.
A need for efficient forest protection for wider ecological considerations and local sustenance is the genesis of the programme.
Madhya Pradesh is the largest state of the country having a geographic area of 44.34 million ha which constitutes 13.49% of the land area of the country. It lies between lat. 17º 47' and 26º 52' N and long. 74º 02' and 84º 24' E. The state can be divided into five physiographic regions: Gird region: the low lying areas in north and north -west of Gwalior, Malwa plateau: a wide table land, Satpura range: stretching from Maikal range in the east to Nimar in the west, Narmada valley located between Vindhyas on the north to the Satpuras on the south and Chhatishgarh plains: fairly level lying towards the east of Satpura range. The Vindhyan range lying north-east to south-east almost runs in the middle of the state. The important rivers towards north of this range are the Chambal, the Betwa, the Sone and towards south, the Narmada, the Mahanadi and the Indravati
The state supports 7.8% of the country’s population. The Total population is 66.18 million (1991 census) of which 76.82% is rural and 23.18% is urban. Population density is 149 persons per sq. km. Scheduled Tribes constitute 23.27% of the total population. Total livestock population is 46.74 million (1992 livestock census). A large part of this population is dependent on forests for grazing.
The recorded forest area of the state is 15.45 million ha which constitutes 34.84% of the geographic area. By legal status, Reserved Forest constitutes 54%, Protected Forest 43% and Unclassed Forest 3%.
There are four forest types viz. Tropical Moist Deciduous, Tropical Dry Deciduous, Tropical Thorn and Sub Tropical Broadleaved Hill Forests. Forests are largely distributed in central, southern and eastern parts of the state. Northern and western parts of the state are deficient in forest vegetation. Teak and Sal are the two most important forest formations of the state, covering 18.0% and 16.7% forest area, respectively while miscellaneous forests cover 65.3%.
For in situ conservation of bio-diversity, 11 National Parks and 35 Wildlife Sanctuaries, covering an area of 1.72 million ha which is 3.87% of the land area of the state, have been created. There are 5 Tiger Reserves namely Kanha, Bandhawgarh, Panna, Pench and Indravati. With 25% of the tiger population of the country in these reserves, the state has earned the sobriquet of the Tiger State of the country. Pachmarhi Biosphere Reserve is one of the 11 Biosphere Reserves of the country. Bhoja, wetland of national importance, is located in Bhopal district, with an area of 33,000 ha.
The state government issued resolution in 1991 to involve the local communities in the management and development of forest resources of the state. A total of 12,038 Forest Protection Committees/Villages Forest Committees are managing about 5.80 million ha forest area under Joint Forest Management programme. It accounts for 56.60% of the total forest area under JFM in the country at present.
The forest areas which can be taken up under the JFM programme include degraded forests as well as well stocked forests. There are two types of committees VFCs and FPCs. In case of VFCs, 70% of the net benefits shall go to the government, 15% to the committee fund, 10% to the individual members, and the remaining 5% shall be ploughed back in the area for its development. In case of FPCs these percentages are 90%, 5%, 3% and 2%, respectively.
VARIOUS ACTIVITIES OF JFM COMMITTEES OF M.P. have been personally conducted with coordination of author as he himself is a forest officer.the details of activities cannot be expressed due to condition of limited words.however following are the derivatives of the research-
Various programmes implemented in tribal areas have brought into sharp focus the importance of socio-cultural factors in the acceptance or rejection of the programme.
1. The programme conforms with the ethos, values and total cultural system of the communities.
2. It mostly conforms to forces of habits and traditions.
3. The programme promotes immediate returns in term of fuel, fodder, NTFP, and some timber after a little wait.
4. The programme envisages common assets being used for the community, and not by individuals.
5. It merges with the traditional occupational activities.
6. The programme is simple and without any technical complication.
7. The programme does not threaten to disintegrate the cross cultural relationship.
8. The change agent is known and mostly dependable.
9. The programme does not give rise to apprehension in the community, orafeeling of insecurity.
Research work can be stated as:
1. The forest resources are inadequate.
2. The forest dependent people located in forest tract have socio-cultural potentials of participation.
3. The types of forests and vegetation therein are varied.
4. There are sensitive zones of biodiversity, wetlands and important fauna.
5. There are fragile edaphic zones, detrimental to very existence of communities.
6. The forestry objectives include the national growth, local growth and conservation of eco-zones for betterment of environment.
7. There are density classes in the forests, viz. open area, covered areas and refractory barren areas. 8. The regenerating capacity of various forest types is also different.
9. The vegetation is not always multi-storied.
10. Potential for enrichment lies in all kinds of forest areas.
11. The role of foresters is required to be oriented for the sustainable development of human and bio-resources.
12. The development of watershed, the biodiversity and sustainable forestry are synonymous.
13. The participation from community can strengthen the present management.
14. The participation in productive forests, protected areas, degraded areas and reclamatory areas should be distinct and suitably crafted.
15. Community participation in Community Forestry is a misnomer. It should be people's programme preferably through co-operative action.
16. The community participation can lead to sustainable forestry through appropriate motivation and technological inputs.
17. The site specific microplanning within the broad plan of watershed development have chances of success.
18. The NG0s, the traditional leaders and village councils can help big way in the programme. The presence of pressure group can hasten the process.
19. The community participation programme may turn out to be an area development programme needing higher financial inputs necessitating external assistance.
20. There is necessity of strong political will to take the programme ahead. The politics should be developmental.
21. "Any investment in forest development is the investment on community needs requires to be highlighted.
22. An open system of research and technology development for indigenous species is necessary. Presently there are significant gaps.
23. Appropriate mass mobilisation process need he given high priority.
24. A well crafted training and education programme is necessary.
25. Local interests and national interests are not different.
To sum up, community participation has the potential for sustainable forestry. The foresters, supported by people who matter and voluntary organisations can take the programme ahead. A shift in forest management including manipulation of vegetation will demand sound research and technology. What is being done for the communities should he transparent and participatory. There are potentials for joint action in development of all common resources. The efforts made in developing the capabilities of communities will make them capable of self governance for sustainable development. The challenge though needing dedication is worth accepting wherever community response is favourable.
Anon. (1990). Forest Management Partnerships: Regenerating India~s Forests, Executive Summary of the Workshop on Sustainable Forestry, New Delhi, 32 pp.
Anon. (1991). Social Forestry, Case studies fi-om Orissa, Commissioned by Directorate of Social Forestry Project, Orissa.
Anon. (1992). Joint Forest Management: Concept and opportunities, Society for Promotion of Wastelands Development.
Malhotra, K.C. and Mark Poffenberger (1989). Forest Regeneration through Community Protection. 47 pp.
Anon. (1983). FAO, SIDA Consultation in Forestry Administration for development. FAO.
Anon. (1992). The State of Forest Report, Forest Survey of India.
Anon. (1985). Report of the 1Xth World Forestry Congress, ILIFRO. Pathan, R.S. (1992). Equity and Bioresources.
Pathan, R.S. (1990). Mass Mobilisation a necessity for sustainable forestry.
Patnaik, M. (1989).Tribal Development Administration. Tribal and Harijan Research Cum Training Institute, BhubaneshWar.
Warren, S.T. (1990). Social dimensions of Agro-forestry extension for resource poorpeople.
Anon. (1986). Monitoring and Evaluation of Social Forestry in India, an operational guide. F.A.0.Anon. (1985). Monitoring and Evaluation of participatory forestry projects.
F.A.0.Anon. (1982). Social Foreskry Project Appraisal Report, Haryana State Forest Department.
Dange, R.P. and B. Phouminh (1990). Evaluation of Social Forestry Programme in Ambala District, Haryana State.
Parkash, M. Shingi, M.S. Patel and S. Widwarkar (1986). Development of Social Forestry in India.
Prashad, V.N. (1985). Principles and Practices of Social and Community Forestry.
Saxena, N.C. (1992). Social Forestry - Why did it fail? The Hindu Survey of Environment.
Working plan-north balaghat territorial forest division & narsinghpur forest division
| [1] Subdivisional forest officer,
M.P. Forest Department, Madhya Pradesh, Govt of India 491001. Tel: 91-7632-240069;
Email: [email protected] |