0480-A1
R.C. Sharma[1]
In the evolutionary process, forests preceded man and became a natural foundation for food, health and livelihood. But with increasing anthropogenic pressure and archaic institutions, particularly in tropical countries, forest degradation continues unabated.
Realizing that natural resources including forests have a lot to do with the well-being of our planet and of humankind, concerns have been expressed about the necessity for conservation and sustainable utilization of forests. However, people may not conserve forests if the process of conservation competes with their survival needs. An adaptive management approach is necessary in this case.
The concept of People’s Protected Area (PPA) has emerged and aims at enhanced well-being for dependent people by facilitating their access to physical, material, human, social and environmental assets, in conjunction with an appropriate entitlement regime unlocking the forests.
With an integrated ecosystem approach, the PPA concept addresses the core concerns of livelihood security, viz. food security, health cover and assured employment. In Chhattisgarh, 32 PPAs extending over nearly 5 lakh ha, covering more than 300 villages have been established as models of conservation through use. In line with the philosophy of care and share, besides collection wages of Rs900 million (US$1 = Rs47. April, 2003), entire profit from tenduleaf trade alone, amounting to Rs400 million has been distributed among the pluckers for the collection season of 2000. New state forest policies and resolutions with a built-in equitable benefit-sharing mechanism are motivating the forests dwellers to become curators and custodians of their bio-cultural habitat.
It is hoped that PPA may emerge as a roadmap for fulfillment of the cherished dream of “Man with Forests” rather than “Man versus Forests”.
And Chhattisgarh has chosen this path.
In the evolutionary process on earth, forests preceded man. Forests, being storehouse of biodiversity, encompassing a variety of plants, animals and microorganisms as well as the eco-systems and ecological processes to which they belong, are part of our lives and comprise the resources upon which families, communities, nations and the future generations depend. But with the ever increasing anthropogenic pressure and the archaic managing institutions, this natural endowment is under great stress.
Appreciating the role and importance of the forests in maintaining the life support system, many innovative management systems varying from regulatory to participatory or their hybrids of numerous shades advocating downsizing, decentralization, devolution, community based forest management, joint forest management(JFM) etc. have been evolved. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development(UNCED) and the Inter-governmental Panel on Forests(IPF) as well as the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests(IFF) followed by the United Nations Forum on Forests(UNFF) have emphasised forestry programmes to manage, protect and restore forests and land, for the benefit of present and posterity.
Despite initiation of these impressive measures, many problems and constraints persist due to multiplicity of factors and actors and their economic, cultural and socio-political milieu. It is a debatable point whether poverty with its pressure to survive or affluence with its pressure to consume leads to environmental degradation but it is more than obvious that poor people cannot be signatory to conservation if it is in conflict with their survival needs. The ground reality is that the ecological security of the forests, divorced from livelihood security of the people has no future.
This paper will, therefore, revisit the fragile link between the ecological security and livelihood security of the dependent people by focusing on vexed issues relating to interdependence of forest development and conservation, sustainability, people’s involvement not merely as beneficiary but as curator and custodian of their bio-cultural habitat, gender analysis, capacity building and enabling policy and legal environment. Finally, a proactive and people friendly framework with actual operational modalities and lessons learnt from the newly created state of Chhattisgarh, India, will be cited to show the efficacy of the innovative approach.
Poverty
Poverty is a complex phenomenon. Apart from the macro economic problems, the degradation and restricted access of the poor, to the available material and environmental assets also fundamentally trap them in their circumstances. Poverty in turn, leads to further degradation of the natural assets and circumscribes the limited access the poor have over the natural resources. This constitutes the vicious circle of poverty, particularly in the resource rich but underdeveloped areas with undefined and inequitable access.
Psychological dimensions of poverty due to lack of voice, power, independence and exploitation leading to feeling of stigma, shame, helplessness, humiliation and marginalization are more painful than the poverty itself. Women are the worst sufferers because in addition to the shocks and misery inflicted on them, they become vulnerable to increased crimes both in public and at home
Mother nature has provided enough for the need though it may not suffice the greed. Paradoxically, there is poverty amidst plenty. In most of the tropical countries poverty map broadly tallies with the forests area which is rich depository of biodiversity. Under this scenario, enhancing human well being through the sustainable management of forests becomes a real challenge.
Perhaps no other word is shrouded with mystery, romanticism complexities and even confusion as the term sustainability. The basic question, which has led to vagueness and at times conflict is-sustainability of what and for whom? Traditionally forests have been viewed as a means towards creation of physical wealth or conservation of biodiversity but to some groups, these are means towards survival as distinct culture and enhanced well being. The sustainability of the forests will therefore, flow from the result of ongoing political process driven by various actors, their respective values, interest, knowledge and their negotiation power-(Remetsteiner 1998).
With a view to harmonize and integrate these parameters, many International/National Processes are refining criteria and indicators(C&I) of sustainable forest management(SFM). But even after extensive scientific, social, economic and political debate, no consensus has been arrived at as to what constitutes the SFM. Varied objectives, value systems, temporal and spatial scales coupled with inherently long time-period to determine the efficacy of the methodologies used for defining and ascertaining SFM particularly in complex tropical forests ecosystems, defy clear and acceptable formulations.
In spite of appropriate legal, policy and administrative environment, the weak institutions do not effectively control undesirable practices. Uncertainty about the tenure and future access to the resource tend to encourage over harvesting. Forest revenues, by and large are credited to the national or state exchequers and are not ploughed back either for resource development or shared with the local communities and consequently, they view forests of little benefit to them.
It would therefore be relevant to reconnect, with the people living in and around forest, a throbbing, simmering empathy for the forest as no mere source for revenue or profit, as no mere carbon sink, but as a bio-cultural habitat, a fast depleting gene bank, as a source of belief and knowledge systems about subsistence and resource management, as a fount of community consanguinity and kinship, of food and medicine, of nutrient for the body, mind and the soul (Chakarvarty 2002). Unless it is so, all laudable initiatives of JFM or SFM will wilt before bloom.
And that is what the people’s protected area(PPA) is all about!
To begin with, let us examine the dynamics of the impact of the people on forests and impact of forests on the people. Under normal conditions, people use forests to satisfy their needs by using local techniques and goods so produced are either consumed or bartered or marketed. But with the increasing population and primitive subsistence agriculture, people go in for more extensive and shifting cultivation or encroachment in forests to meet their growing food requirements. Steep slopes and areas unfit for annual crops are brought under the plough, making it a near ecological disaster. Thus poverty in these areas becomes both the cause and the effect of natural resource degradation (Sharma 99).
The twenty-first century challenge is devolution of greater authority to ensure meeting of community needs, forest resource conservation and sustainable use. Clarifying forest use rights and responsibilities and creating adaptive policies and programs that allow for intensified access controls can lead to more sustainable forest management. (Poffenberger 1996).
Therefore, instead of focusing on ecology alone, the need is to reinforce human building blocks by many ‘E’s like ‘educating’, ‘empowering’, ‘enlisting’ their support and bringing in ‘equity’. Similarly in respect of resources, ‘enhancing and enriching’ and their ‘efficient’ and ‘economic’ use, will support the sustainability of the system.
Diagrammatically this approach can be represented as a green triangle shown below (Sharma 1997): -
Figure 1 - Green Triangle of Locals
To translate this premise, the concept of People’s Protected Area(PPA) has emerged which by targeting on broad range of goods and services in terms of physical, material, human, social and environmental assets in conjunction with appropriate entitlement regime, envisions a proactive framework as pool of assets for meaningful poverty alleviation and their enhanced well being alongwith conservation.
Diagrammatically capital base of PPA is depicted below:-
People’s Protected Areas are in consonance with IUCN Category VI. The PPA makes liberal use of social capital that includes norms of trust, reciprocity and network and the collective beliefs and perceptions of families and communities.
While, JFM has been perceived as a forest department programme in which people participate, PPA involves a paradigm shift from forest management to integrated eco-system management in which socio-economic well being is the goal and forests are viewed as a means to achieve it.
In Chhattisgarh, PPAs have been established with following vision, values and mission:
Vision
Network of People’s Protected Areas(PPAs) as people’s pool of assets for sustainable livelihood and biocultural diversity conservation by unlocking forests for people.
Values
* Highest respect and concern for people and their traditional knowledge.
* Care and share.
* Capacity building at all levels.
* Up gradation of local technologies including Information technology.
Mission
Figure 2 - Location Map of CG
The state of Chhattisgarh(C.G.) spread over an area of 1.35 lakh sq kms. was born on 1st November 2000. State forests spread over 59,772 sq kms covering around 44% of geographical area represent diverse tropical flora and fauna. Furthermore, forests find a place in the rich socio-bio-cultural matrix of the local populace.
To meet the aspirations and expectations of the forest dependent people, a new Forest Policy has been enunciated in Oct 2001. Some of the salient features of the Policy are given below:
Unlocking of the vast array of forest resources on sustainable basis for enhanced well being of local people by converting these open access resources(OAR) into community controlled, prioritized, protected and managed resources.
A shift in accent from major to minor forest produces, from crown to multi-tier forestry and from flagship species to smaller denizens of the forests.
Conserving the Bio-cultural heritage of the state by preserving the biologically rich natural forests that provide the essential cultural milieu to the tribals of the state (Anon. 2001).
The Policy has identified the abundant potential of people living in rural and forest areas for sound participatory forest management and has recommended that PPAs should be established for sustainable forest development, livelihood security and bio-cultural diversity conservation. In line with this, in every forest division, 15000 to 20000 ha. of rich forest area has been selected for implementation of this model of “conservation through use”.
The PPA focuses on sustainable livelihood. Moving away from income or consumption criteria, many a times poverty has been equated with the lack of livelihood security. Livelihood security comprises of multidisciplinary safety nets for furtherance of physiological and psychological well being of the people. To start with, food security, health cover and assured employment become areas of prime concern of sustainable livelihood.
Realizing that food is the basic physiological need of human being and directly associated with his survival, food security envisaging adequacy, stability as well as economic and physical access to food to all people at all times, continues to be the core concern of livelihood security.
Forests reinforce the food security by directly contributing to the food basket in form of edible fruits, flowers, gums, leaves, roots, tubers etc. Income generated from sale of surplus NTFP enables the poor to have access to food. Furthermore, cattle derive their food from the forests, convert it into food items like milk, fat, meat and other dairy products.
PPA accommodates multiple uses of forests for meeting the food requirement of both the people and cattle, on sustainable basis.
Forests have been source of invaluable medicinal plants since the time man realized their preventive and curative properties. Our age-old traditional Indian System of Medicine(ISM) derives maximum of its formulations from plants and plant extracts.
Declaring the state as “Herbal State” it is mainstreaming the state’s excellent tribal and folk medicinal practices by in-situ/ex-situ conservation, domestication, propagation, non-destructive harvesting and validation.
Land and water are two precious natural endowments but they are finite. However, with judicious mix of hardware of physical activities and software of human sensitivities, interesting mechanism can be developed for assured employment.
For those possessing land, upgrade the productivity by a comprehensive package of inputs. Plethora of off-farm income generation activities can be planned for landless.
NTFP or minor forest produce (MFP), originating from diverse sources, ranging from large plants to micro-flora, consisting of heterogeneous products, constitute a critical lifeline for poor forest dwellers. To strengthen it, a Constitutional Amendment provides for endowing Panchayats (village level organization) with the ownership of MFP (Anon.1998).
In line with the philosophy of care and share, 70% of the benefit of the MFP trade is passed over to the gatherers,15% for building infrastructure and 15% for development of the resource. Accordingly, for the collection season 1999 and 2000, all the profit from tendu leaves trade, amounting to Rs. 800 million has been distributed among the pluckers.
As per new Resolution for community participation in conservation and development, the village level forest committees get 100% intermediate yield, 15% to 30% of timber from the final harvesting and MFP is free.
Eco-tourism with low impact utilization of the forest ecosystem services has a great potential for socio-economic development in remote areas. Forests of Chhattisgarh contain various sites of archeological, cultural and religious importance and unique combinations of them constitute nuclei of ecotourism.Three circuits of ecotourism, managed by the committee have been started.
The forest fringe areas are isolated and insulated from the developmental processes. Forest department, due to their presence in these areas, has been considered for facilitating, coordinating and in some cases executing programmes of the line departments. To begin with, on pilot scale about 300 villages, lying within the forest fringe of 5 kilometer in Dhamtari district, have been brought under of forest administration for implementing the integrated ecosystem approach at landscape level by convergence of all development schemes.
The National Forest Policy, 1988 and the Chhattisgarh State Policy, 2001 provides the policy framework of PPA. The legal framework flows from the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and various legislations enacted there under as well as the 73rd Amendment of Indian Constitution viz. Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996.
We do not claim that we have been able to find answers to all the problems but we strongly believe that as the programme will unfold, variety of issues and conflicts will crop up but the solutions will be provided by the community themselves.
In pluralistic environment with multiplicity of stakeholders, both positive and negative, formulating a framework for striking a trade-off between dichotomous threat perceptions arising out of conservation-development orthodoxies becomes a real challenge.
While maintaining health and vitality of forest ecosystems, the concept of People’s Protected Area aims at facilitating people’s access to physical, material, human, social and environmental assets, by unlocking forests with appropriate entitlement regime.
PPA, thus holds a promise to be a resilient and adaptive framework for sustainable forest development, livelihood security and bio-cultural diversity conservation so that forest dwellers do not remain mere wage earners or passive gatherers of forest produce but become proud owners of the assets so generated.
It is hoped that by traversing this route, forests may continue to remain source of life for generations to come.
1. Anon.(1998). Report of the Expert committee on Conferring Ownership Rights of MFP on Panchayat/Gram Sabhas, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
2. Anon. 2002. State Forest Policy 2001, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur
3. Chakravarty, K.K., 2002. Chhattisgarh Forest Policy 2001 - Unlocking Forests for People, Forest Department Chhattisgarh, Raipur.
4. .Poffenberger, M., 1996. Communities and Forest Management - A Report of the IUCN Working Group ISBN: 2-8317-0360-3.
5. Rametsteiner, E., 1998. The Use of SFM-Indicators as Tools in Political and Economic Context; IUFRO/CIFOR/FAO International Conference on Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management, Melbourne, Australia.
6. Sharma, R.C., 1997. Total Forest Management(TFM). Paper presented at the XIth World Forestry Conference, 13-22 October 1997, Antalya, Turkey.
7. Sharma, R.C., 1998. What Ails JFM? Paper presented at the International Seminar on Decentralization and Devolution of Forest Management in Asia and the Pacific. 30 Nov-4 Dec.1998, Davao City, Philippines.
8. Sharma, R.C., 1999. Protected Area Management and Sustainable Rural Development- How can they be Reconciled? Paper presented at FAO/UNEP International Technical Consultation. 26-29 October, 1999, Harare, Zimbabwe
| [1] Principal Chief Conservator
of Forests, Government of Chhattisgarh, Medical College Road, Raipur-492
001, India. Email: [email protected];
[email protected] |