Conservation and Livelihoods
Community Conserved Areas ( India )
Team: Neema Pathak, Ashish Kothari
Contact: natrails@vsnl.com
There are a large number of conservation initiatives in India, in which local communities are playing a central part. These range from continuing traditional practices such as sacred groves, to revived protection of areas which serve as natural resource catchments for the communities, to saving natural habitats from destructive commercial/industrial forces. These could be self-initiated efforts of the communities or supported/facilitated by government or non-government external agencies. It is believed that a very large amount of biodiversity, both 'wild' and 'domesticated', is being conserved by such initiatives. To know more...
To read about Community Conservation in Nagaland click here
Forest Rights
Team: Neema Pathak, Neeraj Vagholikar
Contact: natrails@vsnl.com
The Forest Encroachment Issue
The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has issued a directive on May 3, 2002 (Annexure 1), to summarily evict “all illegal encroachment of forestlands in various States/ Union Territories” before September 30, 2002. This order totally ignores a framework for resolution of disputes related to forest land between tribal people and the State which had been worked out in 1990 by the Union Government, but lies unimplemented. A set of six circulars were issued on September 18, 1990, in this respect. The current directive of the MoEF only refers to one of these circulars dealing with encroachments on forest land but ignores the other circulars on crucial issues such as ‘Review of Disputed Claims over Forest Land arising out of Forest Settlement’ and ‘Disputes Regarding pattas / leases /grants involving forest land’, which have a considerable bearing on deciding what really constitutes an ‘encroachment’ and what does not. In the absence of the implementation of the process as outlined in these guidelines and subsequent directives in this respect, the current order of the MoEF if implemented would mean that lakhs of tribals/ adivasis and other forest dependent communities would be affected/ displaced, thus threatening their very existence. Infact evictions of people are underway in various parts of the country, while some State Governments have stayed the eviction pending orders from the Supreme Court in a case discussing the issue......
Read a Background Note on the Forest Encroachment Issue
Read the Action Plan to evict illegal encroachments
Read the Recommendations by the Central Empowered Committee
Read about the Central Empowered Committee
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Forest Rights) Act 2006
Kalpavriksh has provided a detailed set of comments on the Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006.
India’s scheduled tribes are probably amongst the country’s most marginalized groups of people. Despite some positive actions, constitutional provisions, a number of schemes intended at socially and economically benefiting them, the results on the ground continue to be disappointing. Like most other natural resource dependent people in the country, a central factor affecting tribal livelihood is access to and control over natural resources. A major problem is that traditional homelands of tribal communities have been classified, earlier by the colonial government and subsequently by the Independent Indian government, as forest lands vested with the state. In the absence of clearly defined property rights, millions of tribal families living in or around forest land have been called encroachers or illegal occupants. Not surprisingly therefore such areas have witnessed serious conflicts over land rights – agitations, dharnas and rasta rokos, often resulting in loss of life. The Government of India has therefore promulgated the Scheduled Tribes and other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act in 2006, and Rules are currently (as of March 2007) being framed to make it operational. However, alongside the concern about survival and livelihood of tribal peoples is the equally pressing concern about India’s declining and degrading forest cover and consequent threat to wildlife and environment. Possibly this is why this Act has been embroiled in a serious controversy ev ever since its first draft version (as a Bill) was made public . Here we present Kalpavriksh’s comments on this Act.
Read Comments on the The Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Forest Rights) Act 2006
Read article by Pankaj Sekhsaria, It neednt be Tigers vs Tribals, Indian Express, 11 September 2006
Read article by Pankaj Sekhsaria, The Blame Game, The Hindu, 24 Sept 2006
Protected Areas (India)
Protected Area Update
Team: Pankaj Sekhsaria
Contact: psekhsaria@gmail.com
Protected Area (PA) Update is a digest of news and information from protected areas in India and South Asia, produced by Kalpavriksh, an environment action group, every two months as a follow-up to the workshop on Exploring the Possibilities of Joint Protected Area Management (JPAM), organised at the Indian Institute of Public Administration (IIPA), New Delhi, in September 1994.
To know more...Joint Protected Area Management
Team: Tejaswini Apte
Contact: tejaswiniapte@gmail.com
This booklet is about a collaborative system of protecting natural environments, known as Joint Protected Area Management (JPAM). JPAM attempts to conserve protected areas in a way whereby local communities, wildlife and wildlife habitats can co-exist by mutually benefiting each other, and in which government officials, local people and others work together. The booklet is organised in a simple question and answer format and will be useful for forest officials, NGOs, social activists, local community representatives, conservation researchers, academics, and others who are interested in the conservation of biodiversity and livelihoods based on biodiversity.
Buy a copy
| Comments on Tiger Task Force Team: Ashish Kothari Contact: ashishkothari@vsnl.com A five-member Tiger Task Force (TTF) was constituted by the Prime Minister's Office in April 2005, following the shocking disappearance of tigers from Sariska tiger reserve in Rajasthan (for the terms of reference and composition of the Task Force, please visit: http://projecttiger.nic.in/TTF2005/index.html). Kalpavriksh made a series of submissions to the TTF, including the documents placed below, and a detailed oral presentation at the TTF's meeting in Nagpur. |
Letter to members of the Tiger Task Force 30 May 2005
.....We strongly feel that no amount of ‘guns and guards’ approach will work if the people within and around wildlife habitats are hostile, facing livelihood insecurity, deprived of basic human rights, and forced to become less sustainable in their resource uses. Alternate models of conservation that centrally involve local people, and provide for their livelihood rights and security, need to be explored.....
Follow up note 9 June 2005
...., we strongly feel that you have a historic opportunity to make a difference both for wildlife conservation, and for the livelihood security of traditional communities that have lived amidst important wildlife habitats......
Conservation's New Stripes: The Tiger Task Force Report?
Article by Ashish Kothari, Times of India
Comments on Tiger Task Force Report
Ashish Kothari and Erica Taraporewala
Community Based Conservation ( Global)
| Theme on Indigenous and Local communities, Equity and Protected Areas (TILCEPA) Team: Tasneem Balasinorwala, Ashish Kothari Contact: tilcepa@vsnl.net Members of Kalpavriksh have been involved in this IUCN Task Force that is a global network of people working on issues of communities and conservation, with a specific focus on Protected Areas. TILCEPA is co chaired by Ashish Kothari from 2000. During this time, the subject of Community Conserved Areas gained international attention at events such as the Vth World Parks Congress in Durban and the 3rd World Conservation Congress in Bangkok, besides other regional and international meetings. To know more... |
Andamans and Nicobar Islands Conservation Work
Team: Pankaj Sekhsaria
Contact: psekhsaria@gmail.com
To protect the original tribal inhabitants of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands from the onslaught of "civilizing" influences of the world as we know it, inorder to preserve their dignity , their culture and their harmony with their habitat.
To preserve the existing flora and fauna in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and to protect them from mercernary hands.
To increase awareness on the issues that the indigenous habitants of the Emerald Islands face.
To know more....
Protected Areas and Livelihoods
Future of Conservation network
Team: Ashish Kothari, Neema Pathak, Erica Taraporewala, Arshiya Urveeja Bose
Contact: ashishkothari@vsnl.com
'Future of Conservation in India (FoC)' is a network of ecological and social organizations and individuals committed to effective and equitable conservation of biodiversity. FoC's objective is to foster dialogue and engagement in complex conservation issues, and help tackle the increasing threats that both biodiversity and people's livelihoods face. This includes joint action on areas of agreement, and attempts at evolving common understanding on issues where there are differences.
Given below are some of FoC's involvements:
1. PROPOSED GUIDELINES ON IDENTIFICATION OF CRITICAL TIGER HABITATS, CO-EXISTENCE, AND RELOCATION RELATED TO TIGER RESERVES (IN PURSUANCE OF THE WLPA AS AMENDED IN 2006)
The passing of two recent laws, the Wild Life Amendment Act 2006 and the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006, has profound implications for both conservation of wildlife and the livelihoods of people living in wildlife conservation areas. In particular, three issues are critical to how these Acts will affect the situation on the ground: the identification of critical tiger and other wildlife habitats (which can then be made inviolate and out of bounds of any non-forest or destructive use), the co-existence of wildlife and people in these and other wildlife habitats, and the relocation of people from within areas to be made inviolate if so necessary and if people consent. Each of these issues is complex, and there is need for guidance on how to interpret and implement the relevant provisions. Kalpavriksh and several other organisations have put together such guidance in the attached note. The current version of the note has been sent to the National Tiger Conservation Authority (in relation to the Wild Life Amendment Act for tiger resereves), and another version is being prepared to send to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs and the Ministry of Environment and Forests (in relation to the Forest Rights Act for all other protected areas).
Download this document
2. PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR IDENTIFICATION OF CRITICAL WILDLIFE HABITATS IN NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES UNDER SCHEDULED TRIBES AND OTHER TRADITIONAL FOREST DWELLERS (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS) ACT, 2006
The MoEF's issued its 'Guidelines on Critical Wildlife Habitats (CWH)' in November 2007. However, we feel that these do not adequately provide for a systematic, scientific and democratic process. The criteria for identification of CWH are ambiguous and scientifically questionable, and consultations with local communities in several aspects of the process are only optional. We are also seriously concerned that many state governments are rushing to identify and notify CWH without due scientific and democratic processes. Already there is information that this is causing conflict and tension amongst communities, leading to situations that will rebound on conservation. We have already sent detailed comments on this to MoEF.
In this regard, several of the organisations as part of the FoC Network, have prepared guidelines for the identification and establishment of CWH, through sound modern and traditional knowledge and a fully democratic process. Some key steps in these guidelines are:
a). When identifying CWH, it is important to note that a mix of approaches is needed to secure wildlife and ecosystems in India, including areas of no-use, minimal-use and multiple-use.
b). The size of each part of the CWH, including inviolate areas if any, must be based on ecological, biological and landscape ecology principles. The decision should also consider what is feasible given various socioeconomic factors, including (but not only) if the number of bona fide rights holders affected is large or the human communities involved are particularly vulnerable.
c). The process for establishing a CWH at a state level should be participatory from the time of identification and planning to implementation. It should involve national/state/local experts, representatives of traditional long-resident and user communities, and government staff, and be fully transparent. Sanctuary Advisory Committees as mandated by Section 33b of the Wild Life Protection Act 1972 could be used as a platform to achieve this successfully.
We urge the government to adopt these guidelines in place of or additional to the MoEF Guidelines. This could go a long way in achieving a systematic process to assess which are the most critical areas for conservation, and move towards ways for people to either coexist or consent to be relocated.
Download this document
Download a Press Statement on this issue
Download FoC's Comments on the MoEF Guidelines
Download a Letter to all Chief Minister's of States on this issue
EXTERNAL LINKS OF OTHER FoC MEMBERS:
Conservation and Peoples Livelihoods Rights
Team: Milind Wani
Contact: milindwani@yahoo.com
This study attempts to understand the:
- impacts of some of India’s conservation policies and programs on the livelihoods and livelihood rights of ecosystem-dependent communities,
- ongoing attempts to evolve alternative models that integrate conservation and livelihoods and
The study places itself within the context of United Nation’s Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of halving extreme poverty by 2015. The paper is based on site visits to study the actual on-ground situation in PAs in 3 states of India (Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh), and an analysis of conservation policies, undertaken as part of a Small Grants Programme research project funded by UNESCO. It places itself within UNESCO’s perspective that freedom from poverty is an issue basic to ensuring the protection of human rights.
Our research at these 3 states of India suggests that conservation policy is having significant adverse impacts on resident and user communities. Some sincere attempts by the state and/or by NGOs to mitigate or minimize these impacts have been made, but they remain very inadequate. Our studies show that poverty has indeed been a significant feature of the communities living within protected areas.
Issues of poverty, conservation, human rights, citizenship rights, and land/resource tenure rights specific to India’s history and social-economic conditions cannot be addressed in a piece-meal manner, as has been done so far. A Human rights based approach to poverty, that:
- integrates conservation and livelihoods issues and
- evokes active and informed participation of the poor people and communities living within protected areas.
needs to be adapted.
Conservation policy itself needs to embrace new paradigms of governance and participation that many countries are exploring.
Download the Final report of this research project here (Pdf version)FOREST FIRES AND THE BAN ON NTFP COLLECTION IN BILIGIRI RANGASWAMY TEMPLE SANCTUARY, KARNATAKA
Team: Ashish Kothari, Saili Palande, Milind Wani
Contact: ashishkothari@vsnl.com
In May 2007, Kalpavriksh conducted a field investigation into incidences of forest fires and resulting tension between the Forest Department and Soliga adivasis in the Biligiri Rangaswamy Sanctuary, Karnataka. The investigation revealed that most crucial issue facing the Sanctuary and the adivasis was the ban on collection of non-timber forest produce (NTFP), which has traditionally been a significant source of livelihood for several thousand Soligas. The ban has caused widespread suffering, and also backfired on conservation itself. Urgent steps are needed to resolve the situation, and to move towards healthier collaboration between the Forest Department and the Soligas, aided by NGOs that have been working in the Sanctuary for many years. The investigation report gives details of the findings, and a set of recommendations for the state government, the Soliga Sangha, and NGOs.
Read more and download the report here...
