Das, Amarendra (2007): Poverty Induced Forest Degradation in JFM Regime: Evidence from India.
Download (374kB) | Preview
Around 28% of the total forest area in India has been brought under Joint Forest Management (JFM) and rest 72% remains virtually open access to local communities. In such a scenario, communities actively participating in JFM are also engaged in degrading de facto open access forests to meet their basic livelihood necessities. This reveals that, the poverty induced forest degradation still continues in JFM regime. This paper theoretically and empirically explains the factors that determine the individual indulgence in forest degradation. Based on a survey of 140 households in three forest fringe villages of Chandaka Wildlife Division of Orissa Sate in India, the study shows that lack of education, landlessness and low environmental awareness significantly influence the individual involvement in forest degradation. The implementation of JFM merely transfers the dependence of local community from one patch to another. It shows that unless the source of livelihood is secured, forest degradation by rural poor households would persist. In order to halt this depressing scenario, it calls for raising the individual opportunity cost through employment generation, skill formation and land allocation to the landless.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Poverty Induced Forest Degradation in JFM Regime: Evidence from India|
|English Title:||Poverty Induced Forest Degradation in JFM Regime: Evidence from India|
|Keywords:||Poverty, Forest Degradation, JFM|
|Subjects:||Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q2 - Renewable Resources and Conservation > Q23 - Forestry
Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q0 - General > Q00 - General
|Depositing User:||Amarendra Das|
|Date Deposited:||16. Nov 2009 00:07|
|Last Modified:||14. Feb 2013 03:24|
Adhikari Bhim, 2005. Poverty, property rights and collective action: understanding the distributive aspects of common property resource management, Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 10, Issue 01.
Agrawal, Arun, 2000. Small is beautiful, but is larger better? Forest- management institutions in the Kumaon Himalaya, India. In Clark C. Gibson et al (Editors), People and forests: communities, institutions, and governance. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England.
Angelsen Arild & Sven Wunder, 2003. Exploring the forest-poverty link: key concepts, issues and research implications. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 40.
Baland, J.M., & Platteau, J.P., 1996. Halting Degradation of Natural Resources: Is there a role for rural communities? Clarendon Press: Oxford.
Cavendish William, 2000. Empirical regularities in the poverty-environment relationship of rural households: Evidence from Zimbabwe. World Development Vol. 28, No.11, pp.1979-2003.
Chopra Kanchan and Purnamita Dasgupta, 2008. Nature of household dependence on common pool resources: An empirical study. Economic and Political Weekly, February 23, pp.58-66.
Dasgupta, Partha and Goran Maler, 1994. Poverty, institutions and environmental-resource base. World Bank Environment Paper No. 9, Washington DC.
Dutta, Madhumati; Roy, Souvanic; Maiti, Dibyendu S.; Saha, Shubhayu, 2005. Protecting India’s forests: The effectiveness of forest protection communities: The case of southern West Bengal. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 12, 68-77.
Field Andy, 2005. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, 2nd Edition, London: Sage Publications.
Forest Survey of India, 2005. ‘State of Forest Report. Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India. Dehradun, India
Ghate, Rucha, 2003. Enquiring ‘Collective Action’ in ‘Participatory’ Forest Management. SANDEE Working Paper No. 3-03.
Hussain, Zakir and Rabindra N, Bhattacharya, 2004. Attitudes and institutions: Contrasting experiences of Joint Forest Management in India. Environment and Development Economics. 9: 563-577.
Jodha, N. S., 1986. Common property resources and rural poor in dry regions of India. Economic and Political Weekly xxi:27, July.
Khare Arvind Madhu Sarin, N C Saxena, Subhabrata Palit Seema Bathla, Farhad Vania, and M Satyanarayana, 2000. Joint forest management: policy, practice and prospects. Policy that works for forests and people series no.3. International Institute for Environment and Development, 3 Endsleigh Street London, UK.
Olson, Mancur, 1971. The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Olson. Mansur, 1965. The logic of collective action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Patnaik, Utsa, 1999. Ascertaining the economic characteristics of peasant classes-in-themselves in rural India: A methodological and empirical exercise in the long transition: Essays on political economy. Tulika, New Delhi, India
Pattanayak S, K and Erin O. Sills, 2001. Do tropical forests provide natural insurance? The microeconomics of non-timber forest product collection in Brazilian Amazon. Land Economics, 77(4), pp.595-612
Reddy V. Ratna, 1999. Valuation of Renewable Natural Resources: User Perspective. Economic and Political Weekly. June 5: pp.1435-1444.
Reddy, S. R. C & S, P, Chakravarty, 1999. Forest dependence and income distribution in subsistence economy: Evidences from India. World Development Vol. 27. No. 7. Pp. 1141-1149.
Saha, Subhayu, 2004. Diversity in communities, divergence in outcomes, dilemmas for policy in community-based forest management. Paper presented at the International Association of Common Property Resources conference in Oaxaca, Mexico, August 9-13 2004
Somanathan, E et al, 2002. Collective action for forest conservation: Does heterogeneity matter? Discussion Paper 02-01. Indian Statistical Institute, Planning Unit, New Delhi.
Vira, Bhaskar, 2005. Deconstructing the Harda Experience: Limits of Bureaucratic Participation. Economic and Political Weekly, pp 5068-75, November 26, Vol XL, No 48
World Bank, 1992. World Development Report. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University press, Oxford, New York.
World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development , 1999. Our Forests, Our Future. Cambridge University Press.