0131-C1
P.C. Kotwal[1] and Dharmendra Chandurkar
Adaptive management is viewed as a paradigm that can enhance efficiency of decision-making processes related to resource management in a multi-actor environment. For forest managers it opens new vistas for sustainable management of forestry resources. In the Indian context, adaptive co-management provides opportunities for addressing the critical problems of forest resource security and livelihood security of forest-dependent communities. This would necessitate developing and institutionalizing monitoring systems and learning processes in the co-management regime in vogue. For operationalizing adaptive co-management, first local level Criteria and Indicators (C&I) are developed and thereafter the C&I-based monitoring system is institutionalized with concurrent capacity enhancement and system design. Based on the tenets of community participation, incorporation of local knowledge and building on local capacities, the model provides a simple mechanism for operationalizing adaptive co-management in India. In view of the limitations posed by the western models in terms of costs, spatial scale and technology requirements, the model provides robust mechanisms suitable in the Indian context.
Over the last two decades, adaptive management has gained worldwide importance as a paradigm that can increase efficiency of acquiring critical knowledge for making resource management decisions, especially in human dominated ecosystems (Rogers 1998 and Johnson 1999). Building on the tenets of ‘learning process’ and institutions; adaptive management has opened new vistas for solving complex problems related to natural resource management, especially large systems. Adaptive management is of critical significance in forest management, particularly for reconciling multiple interests, often conflicting (Nyberg and Taylor 1995 and Rhee 2000). For forest-managers, it relates to constructive and sustainable people-forest interface. In Low Forest Cover Countries (LFCC), adaptive management becomes imperative, owing to its potential for sustainable governance of forests. Furthermore, adaptive management also provides avenues for incorporating local capacities, institutions and knowledge systems in the management regime (Pandey 2001 and Korber et al. 2002). Henceforth, in collaborative forest management, along with devolution, it also leads to empowerment of communities. In sustainable livelihood context, adaptive management ensures enhanced access to and control over their own resources.
In India, people living in and in the vicinity of forests have very high dependence on the forests for food, fuel, fodder, medicines and other livelihood alternatives. This together with competing land use options, urban and industrial demand compounds the pressure on the forests. The trends in forest degradation and depletion over the last few decades and its consequent socio-economic impacts led to policy mandate on Participatory Forest Management. The collaborative regime envisions management of forests encompassing ecological, economic and socio-cultural values; through formation of peoples institutions. Community participation in decision-making and benefit sharing are the high points of the regime, called Joint Forest Management (JFM), which is envisioned as the vehicle to achieve Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) objectives (GoI 1990).
Though JFM has been successful in rehabilitation of forests, an objective assessment system for continuous monitoring and assessment of direction of change is not built in the management system. This poses limitations for change assessment and undertaking timely corrective action. Henceforth, the impacts of actions and learnings do not form inputs to the future planning and implementation process. Operationalising efficient monitoring systems and henceforth initiating adaptive management is pre-requisite for sustainable management of forestry resources in India.
The western models of adaptive management have mostly been developed for large systems. Also, these models are technology intensive and hence high cost. In Indian context, the spatial scale of the resource limitations of technology and financial resources pose bottlenecks for application of these models. Further, the small size of the eco-systems, at times as small as 0.1 square kilometres, necessitate alternative models. In cognizance of the micro-context and other limitations, it is necessary to develop models that build on local capacities and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), require minimum technology inputs and are cost effective. This paper is based on experience in implementing a pilot project titled "Operational strategy for Sustainable Forestry Development with community participation in India", sponsored by International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO). The project is being executed by Indian Institute of Forest Management (IIFM), a premier forestry education, training and research institution of Government of India (GoI). The paper describes the adaptive management model being operationalised under the aegis of the project. The model based on Criteria and Indicators (C&I) for SFM, developed under the Bhopal-India Process, is envisaged as an effective operational model with respect to Indian conditions.
Before scientific forestry and state forest management, forests in and around the villages were managed as common property resources. The indic management dates back to almost 3000 years. With the objective of livelihood support and sustainable management, the management systems were characterized by TEK (Traditional Ecological Knowledge) and well-defined institutional mechanisms for resource management, cultural learning, local capacities and simple ‘rule of thumb’ ensured livelihood and resource security (Gadgil and Guha 1995 and Pandey 1998). State forest management had its formal beginning in India in 1860. The management over-ruled the traditional resource management regime and delegitimised the local institutions. Also, the colonial regime imposed the objectives of timber production and henceforth, alienated people and accentuated policing of forests. Also, during the colonial era, forests were seconded to agricultural interests. This often resulted in breaking down of traditional institutions and knowledge systems.
The first Indian Forest Policy of 1952, stressed upon ecological and economic perspectives (GoI 1952). However industrial demand superseded ecological objectives and degradation and depletion of the resource continued. Social forestry programmes were also initiated during the decade of 60’s for involving people in enhancing tree cover and meeting local needs. But, the programme per se focussed on areas outside forests and met limited success. In view of the trends, the National Commission on Agriculture 1976 suggested policy revision and this led to the National Forest Policy 1988, the present policy.
The present policy advocates holistic management of forests with active involvement of people. Also, sustainable forest management and livelihood security of forest dependent communities was the central theme of the policy (GoI 1988). In 1990, the Govt. issued Joint Forest Management resolution that heralded a paradigm shift in forest management, from Govt. managed to participatory management with communities. This initiated a process of rehabilitation of forests with participation of communities. Capacity enhancement, institutional building and benefit sharing between state and locals were salient features of the new co-management regime. The 2000 guidelines on JFM further strengthened the mandate, focussing on women’s participation and structural issues (GoI 2000). Today, 62890 village institutions are involved in eco-restoration of approximately 0.1445 million square kilometres of degraded forests (GoI 2001).
The 1988 Forest Policy is a milestone in forest management in India. The policy even before the Rio Earth Summit, advocated sustainable management of forestry resources in the country, exemplifying the vision of Indian foresters. In cognizance to the international imperatives, the Indian initiative came in 1998 (IIFM 2000) in the form of Bhopal-India process. In 1999 the process led to development of 8 criteria and 53 indicators for SFM in India (IIFM 1999). The same year GoI constituted a Task Force on SFM, which recommended a refined set of 8 criteria and 43 indicators and Indian Institute of Forest Management (IIFM) as nodal agency for operationalising SFM in India; the recommendations were accepted by GoI in 2000 (IIFM 2000a).
Concurrent to the Task Force was the ITTO sponsored pre-project "Sustainable Forest Management through community participation in India". This initiated a nation-wide dialogue on SFM, at the same time extended the concept to the very grassroots (IIFM 2000b). Currently Government of India (GoI) is implementing a pilot project tiled "Operational strategy for Sustainable Forestry Development with community participation in India" envisions creation of conditions for SFM in India, and enhancement of institutional and individual capacities for operationalising SFM. In cognizance with the participatory regime, the project is being implemented through community participation in 40 JFMCs (Joint Forest Management Committees). Development of local level C&I through community participation and their implementation being the central theme. The specific objectives of the project include development and operationalisation of a well defined system of C&I at JFMC, FMU (Forest Management Unit) and provincial level, strengthening institutional and individual capabilities for SFM implementation, expert information system and forestry resource accounting system and knowledge sharing (IIFM 2000c). A generic system of C&I has been developed and being implemented in the selected 8 project sites. The system at community level is discussed in the following sections.
The operationalisation is done in two phases, first being C&I development phase and second the Institutionalisation phase. The process is schematically illustrated in Fig 1.
Figure 1: Model for Adaptive Co-Management
Phase I: C&I development phase
The C&I development phase comprises of two distinct steps. First the communities are sensitized about the concept of C&I, SFM and adaptive management. This is followed by development of local level C&I, specific to the JFMC. This essentially is a workshop-based method the participants being all local level stakeholders and the process called as Local Unit Criteria and Indicator Development i.e. LUCID (Kotwal and Chandurkar 2002). Fig 2 gives the details of the process, the conceptual framework being synthesis of top down and bottom-up approach the basis being the C&I set of Bhopal-India process (Chandurkar et al. 1999). Building on local contexts and experiences, the tools used for the workshop were open house discussion sessions, games, and group exercises. The situation of local forest environment was always kept in the mind while arriving at the local level indicators. A draft set of C&I is arrived at through break-out group discussions and presentations. The draft set is field validated to arrive at the site-specific set of C&I. This evolved set of C&I forms the basis of the monitoring system that is central to adaptive co-management.
Figure 2: Methodological framework for evolving C&I
Phase II: Institutionalisation phase
This phase focuses on capability enhancement and institutionalizing the C&I system for monitoring. After analysis of specific training needs for monitoring and undertaking forestry operations, competency enhancement initiatives are designed and implemented. Simultaneous development of systems and the process of assigning responsibilities for operationalising the systems is the next step. Assessment of status of resources, analysis and the process of micro planning follows. For addressing problem areas, management interventions are undertaken. Results of the management actions are evaluated and form inputs to further planning process, thus, initiating a learning process. Also, capacity building may be required as new capacities would be necessary, Knowledge sharing with external environment would facilitate cross learning. The detailed process is illustrated in Fig 3.
Figure 3. Framework for operationalising adaptive co-management
The Indian forests spanning an area of 0.6373 million square kilometres (19.39% of the total geographical area of the country) provide sustenance to nearly 20 million tribal communities living in and around the forests. The forests that are 2% of the world’s forests, supports 16% of the world’s population. India ranks sixth among the 12 major mega- biodiversity countries in the world and has almost 15% of the forests under the protected area network. Also, with almost 18% of the world’s cattle population, depending primarily on forests for grazing, the pressure on the forest resources is tremendous. Although, there has been some slow-down in the trends of deforestation, the figure is still as high as 0.1 million ha per year (GoI 1999).
Adaptive co-management in India is an imperative owing to the resource status and the pressure on the resource especially of livelihood support system of the forest dwelling communities. This would necessitate incorporating a monitoring system in existing regime at the same time reflecting learnings from action in planning processes. The approach discussed above builds on C&I for SFM as monitoring tools and initiates the learning process.
The framework of first phase of C&I development provides a simple and easy to use mechanism for evolving site-specific set of C&I. The processes and tools employed elicit maximum participation of the stakeholders. Also, the process ensures that local knowledge and wisdom is reflected in the developed C&I. The evolved indicators are simple and relevant to the sites economic, ecological and socio cultural environment. Although based on day-to-day interface with the forests, the indicators developed have sound scientific basis. Also, measurement of the indicators can be done with local capacities with some capability enhancement at the same time the technological requirements are minimum and hence the costs. For example the indicator "distance travelled for collection of fuelwood" is an indicator of forests resource productivity. In local context it is a very important concept and can be easily assessed by the communities.
The second phase of institutionalisation initiates a learning process, where in the C&I developed in the first phase form the instruments for providing inputs. Competency enhancement is critical to the process, as skills are required for undertaking the planning and implementation phase. Also, in the multi-actor environment conflicts do exist and hence identification of specific responsibility centres is necessary for resolving these conflicts. For planning, participatory techniques would concurrently address the local needs and problem areas identified during assessment process. Forest management operations henceforth undertaken would ensure steady progress towards SFM and objectives of sustainable development.
The approach is based on participatory processes and hence people-centred. In cognizance of the technological and financial limitations, local capacities, institutions, knowledge and wisdom forms the basis of the model. Also, the flexibility it provides in operationalisation makes it easily replicable for up scaling in the country.
For sustainable livelihoods of forest-dwelling communities in India, sustainable management of forestry resources is fundamental. Also for attaining the policy objectives of sustainable forest management with community participation, initiating adaptive management regime becomes imperative. Though, alternate models are necessitated, expansion of adaptive management to whole of the Indian forests is a big task. For these, massive capacity building efforts are needed at the same time training of trainers is pre-requisite in view of the spatial scale. Also, financial resource mobilisation is another issue along with low cost technology development for making the management regime more efficient and effective. Designing appropriate institutional mechanisms for operationalisation and knowledge dissemination are the tasks ahead.
The model is in initial stages of implementation at 40 JFMCs in 8 different areas. The phase 1 i.e. the C&I development has sensitised the communities and evolved sets of local unit C&I for SFM. The initial steps of the Phase II i.e. Institutionalisation phase have been successfully implemented. The communities were organised into committees (as under the JFM Resolutions of GoI). Further, the local capacities for implementing this model were enhanced through various community level trainings based on locally evolved exercises. The information hence gathered would provide alternatives to meet challenges at local levels. And provide improved management to address various decimating factors viz. unorganised cattle grazing, accidental forest fires and over-exploitation, hence ensuring progress towards sustainability of forest resources. Also, to complement the learning process various knowledge-sharing opportunities were provided to the communities. Thus, adaptive co-management regime would ensure good management practices at local levels and hence contributing towards better lives.
1. Chandurkar, D.; Kharkongar, J.T and Jadhav, Y.D., 1999. Testing of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management through community participation in India. Organisational training report No. 611. Indian Institute of Forest Management, Bhopal. India.
2. Gadgil, M and Guha, R., 1995. Equity and Ecology: The use and abuse of nature in contemporary India. Penguin, New Delhi. India.
3. GoI, 1952. Indian Forest Policy 1952. Government of India, New Delhi. India.
4. GoI, 1988. National Forest Policy 1988. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Government of India. New Delhi. India.
5. GoI, 1990. Government of India resolution on Joint Forest Management. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, New Delhi, India
6. GoI, 1999. National Forestry Action Plan. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Government of India. New Delhi. India
7. GoI, 2000. Strengthening of Joint forest Management. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India,. New Delhi. India.
8. GoI, 2001. http://www.envfor.nic.in
9. IIFM, 1999. Proceedings of the National Technical Workshop for evolving criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management in India. 21-23 January 1999, Bhopal. Indian Institute of Forest Management, Bhopal. India.
10. IIFM, 2000. Bhopal-India Process for Sustainable Management of Indian Forests. Sustainable forest management series. Indian Institute of Forest Management. Bhopal. India
11. IIFM, 2000a. Report of the National Task Force on sustainable forest management. Indian Institute of Forest Management. Bhopal-India.
12. IIFM, 2000b. Final report of the Pre-Project "Sustainable forest management through community participation in India". Indian Institute of Forest Management, Bhopal. India.
13. IIFM, 2000c. Project document of the Project "Operational strategy for sustainable forestry development with community participation in India". Indian Institute of Forest Management. Bhopal. India.
14. Johnson, B.L., 1999. The role of adaptive management as an operational approach for resource management agencies. Conservation Ecology 3(2):8 [Online] http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/art8.
15. Korber, Dianne; Purlee, Brenda and Stevenson, Marc. eds. 2002. Incorporating aboriginal knowledge, values and institutions into Sustainable Forest Management: Taking stock of where we’ve been and where we’re going. November 3, 2001. Winnipeg, Manitoba. ISBN 1-55261-162-0.
16. Kotwal, P.C. and Chandurkar. D., 2002. Developing Local level Criteria and Indicator. C&I India update. Volume 1. Number 1. pp. 14.
17. Nyberg, J.B. and Taylor, B., 1995. Applying adaptive management in British Columbia’s Forests. In proceedings of the FAO/ECE/ILO International Forestry Seminar, Prince George, BC, September 9-15, 1995. pp 239-245.
18. Pandey, D.N., 1998. Ethnoforestry: Local knowledge for sustainable forestry and livelihood security. Himanshu/AFN, New Delhi. India
19. Pandey, D.N., 2001. Sustainability science of local communities. Science. Vol 292. Number 5517.pp.641.
20. Rhee, Steve., 2000. Adaptive co-management of forests. How powerful stakeholders represent local communities, TRI new. Spring 2000. pp. 10-13.
21. Rogers, Kevin., 1998. "Managing science/management partnerships: a challenge of adaptive management". Conservation Ecology [Online] 2(2):R1. http://www.consecol.org/vol2/iss2/resp1.
|
[1] Associate Professor,
Ecosystems Management and Technical Forestry, Indian Institute of Forest
Management, Nehru Nagar, Bhopal-462003, India. Tel: + 91-755-775716, 773799;
Fax: +91-755-772878; Email: [email protected] |
){kind=link}