The implementation of the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 has been extended to the protected areas (PAs) with a view to promote livelihoods of socially and economically vulnerable forest dwellers and thereby encouraging their participation in the forest management. In this context, this study examines the relationship between ecosystem services and human well-being, and how the recognition of forest rights under FRA has influenced this relationship by taking a case study of Odisha. By using primary data collected from 221 sample households located inside the Lakhari Valley Wildlife Sanctuary of Odisha, the article explains the levels of household well-being and their attitude towards conservation after provision of land rights under the FRA. The study also constructs multidimensional poverty index (MPI) and ecosystem conservation index (ECI) and tests their relationship by a simultaneous probit model.
AagesenD. (2000). Rights to land and resources in Argentina’s Alerces National Park. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 19(4), 547–569.
2.
AlkireS.FosterJ. (2007). Counting and multidimensional poverty measures. Oxford: Oxford University, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative.
3.
BanerjeeA.GhoshS.Springate-BaginskiO. (2010). Obstructed access to forest justice in West Bengal state violations in the mis-implementation of the forest rights act 2006. Manchester: Institutions and Pro-Poor Growth (IPPG), University of Manchester.
4.
BoseP. (2011). Forest tenure reform: Exclusion of tribal women’s rights in semi-arid Rajasthan, India. International Forestry Review, 13(2), 220–232.
5.
CampeseJ. (2009). Rights-based approaches to conservation: An Overview of concepts and questions. In CampeseJ.SunderlandT.GreiberT.OviedoG. (Eds), Rights-based approaches: Exploring issues and opportunities for conservation (pp. 1–41). Bogor: CIFOR and IUCN.
6.
ChildB. (2004). Parks in transition: Biodiversity, rural development and the bottom line. London: Earthscan.
7.
DFOGajapati. (2007). Management plan for Lakhari valley wildlife sanctuary of Paralakhemundi forest division for the period 2006–2007 to 2015–2016. New Delhi: Government of India.
8.
Enviro Legal Defence Firm. (2012). Synergy in various institutions in implementation of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 to ensure improved livelihood support as also sustainable forest management. Dehradun: Indian Council of Forest Research and Education, Ministry of Environment and Forest.
9.
GangaR.JulianA.JamesB. (2011). Forest tenure in Asia: Status and trends. Bangkok: RECOFTC.
10.
Government of India. (2006). The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. New Delhi: Ministry of Law and Justice.
11.
GreiberT. (2009). Conservation with justice: A rights-based approach. Gland: IUCN.
12.
GujaratiD. N. (2004). Basic econometrics (4th ed.). New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.
13.
IUCN. (2005). Benefits beyond boundaries. Proceedings of the Vth IUCN World Parks Congress (p. ix + 306 pp). Gland and Cambridge: IUCN.
14.
KolenikovS.AngelesG. (2009). Socioeconomic status measurement with discrete proxy variables: Is principal component analysis a reliable answer?Review of Income and Wealth, 55(1), 128–165.
15.
MaddalaG. (1983). Limited dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
MaddalaG. (1988). Introduction to econometrics. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
17.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005a). Ecosystem and wellbeing: A framework for Assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.
18.
MoEF/MoTA Forest Rights Act Committee. (2010). Report on issues of implementation of the forest rights act in Odisha. Bhubaneswar: Government of India.
19.
NjongA. M.NingayeP. (2008). Characterizing weights in the measurement of multidimensional poverty: An application of data-driven approaches to cameroonian data (OPHI Working Paper No. 21). Oxford: OPHI.
20.
RamnathM. (2008). Surviving the forest rights act: Between scylla and charybdis. Economic and Political Weekly, 43 (9), 37–42.
21.
SalafskyN.DugelbyB.TerborghJ. W. (1993). Can extractive reserves save the rainforest? An ecological and socioeconomic comparison of non timber forest products extraction systems in Petén, Guatemala and West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Conservation Biology, 7(1), 39–52.
22.
SalafskyN.WollenbergE. (2000). Linking livelihoods and conservation: A conceptual framework and scale for assessing the integration of human and biodiversity. World Development, 28(8), 1421–1438.
23.
SarapK.SarangiT.NaikJ. (2013). Implementation of Forest Rights Act 2006 in Odisha: Process, constraints and outcome. Economic and Political Weekly, 48(36), 61–67.
24.
SathyapalanJ. (2010). Implementation of the forest rights act in the Western Ghats region of Kerala. Economic & Political Weekly, 45(30), 65–72.
25.
ScherlL. M. A.WilsonR.WildJ.BlockhusP.FranksJ. A. McNeelyet al. (2004). Can protected areas contribute to poverty reduction? Opportunities and limitations. Gland and Cambridge: IUCN.
26.
SchlagerE.OstromE. (1992). Property rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Economics, 68(3), 249–262.
27.
Springate-BaginskiO.SarinM.GhoshS.DasguptaP.BoseI.BanerjeeA.et al. (2009). Redressing ‘historical injustice’ through the Indian forest rights act 2006: A historical institutional analysis of contemporary forest rights reform, improving institutions for pro-poor growth (Discussion Paper Series No. 27). Department for International Development.
