Livelihood-focused conservation model for Maharashtra

Abstract

Livelihood Rights amount to dependence of local villagers upon the forests for meeting their bonafide needs of timber, firewood and minor forest produce. As they earn their wage income from forest-related activities and have their homes in forests, they get financial and social security as well. Conservation connotes ensuring sustainability of ecosystem that encompasses soil, water, air, flora and fauna, in a waya whole life-support system. There is a popular notion that Livelihood rights of Forest-dependent people jeopardize conservation as People-centric conservation policies are in conflict with Conservation-centric laws. This is based on the precept that harvest of forest produce affects regeneration. It is applicable to commercial harvest but, certainly, may not hold well, in cases of livelihood-driven extraction. The line demarcating these two domains is hazy. To that, contradicting judicial pronouncements under the influence of evolving global conservation conventions have added more confusion. Growing number of scanners of conservation activities in the form of Supreme Court, High Courts, Centrally Empowered Committee, National Forest Commission, NGOs, Media and recently created PM-appointed committee headed by Sunita Narayan to probe reasons for dwindling number of tigers in Sariska, cumulatively, create an air of urgency to resolve the existing paradox. This dissertation probes several ongoing national and international efforts attempted to resolve this conflict. To that, diverge perceptions of all the relevant stakeholders over the twin issues through questionnaire-cum-interviews was collated. Politicians, Bureaucrats, Forest Officers, Media people, NGOs and Academia with credible past experience about the twin issues, of Karnataka and Maharashtra state were interviewed. Stakeholder Analysis was corroborated by the innovations in the existing policy indictors to discern cause and affect relationship in regard to social capital with livelihood security status with in a society. Likewise, inter-relation of ecological capital with eco restoration status of an ecosystem and need of economic capital investment in the economy for achieving sustainable development too was analysed. The analysis reveals that social capital is crucial but insufficient economic capital often results in ecological degradation. Forest-rich belts, therefore, need empowerment of local village institutions. Promotion to forest produce-based sustainable industries in such areas may ensure eco restoration as well as economic well-being. Need to invoke this to arrest social strife simmering in forest-rich tribal belts may no longer be denied. Resource-starved degraded forest regions needs investment from private sectors along the line of sustainability while ensuring livelihood security and thereby ushering in a holistic development. Tripartite arrangement among Private sector, Federation of existing Forest protection Committees and Forest Development Corporations may turn out to be a viable strategy. Experiences world over have proved this beyond doubt. Care, however, should be taken to ensure that unalloyed commercial interests of private sectors may not jeopardise social capital and in turn livelihood security. Livelihood security, certainly, warrants judicious and adequate investment in Conservation for its sustenance.