Community participation emerged as the defining principle of forest policies all over the world in the closing decades of the last century. In India, this came about after the Indian forest policies went through different stages from largely commercial-centric to a community-oriented approach. The access to forests and participation in their management has always been a bone of contention between the state agencies and the local communities. The colonial forest policy of the British and the first forest policy of independent India systematically curtailed the traditional rights and role of forest-dependent communities while claiming to address community demands. After a long and continuous denial of the crucial stake that local communities have in their nearby forests, it was only in late 1980s that they were accorded some space. While the current policies seem to be advancing communities’ role in forest management, yet there are several bottlenecks in terms of their implementation. The dominant role of the forest department, failure to involve community as an equal partner, weak institutional mechanism and inadequate legal back up, among other factors, have obstructed the satisfactory execution of the policies. This article is a critical overview of the changing paradigms of successive forest policies in India and argues that the real participation of the community can be ensured only when it is accorded a meaningful stake in all forest matters affecting the community.
Agarwal, B. (1997). Environmental action, gender equity and women’s participation . Development and Change, 28: 1–44 .
2.
Aiyar, M.S. (2008). Recognizing the rights of forest dependents . Yojana, 52: 5–9 .
3.
Amar Ujala (2010, February 26). Information regarding Forest Rights Act 2006 . Amar Ujala, Daily News Paper in Hindi.
4.
Bahuguna, V.K. (2000). Joint forest management: An instrument for sustainable forest management. In V.K. Bahuguna and P. Woods (eds), India’s forests beyond 2000 (pp. 60–66). India: Commonwealth Forestry Association .
5.
Banari, T. , and Marglin, F.A. (1993). A system of knowledge analysis of deforestation, participation and management. In T. Banari and F.A. Marglin (eds), Who will save the forest? Knowledge, power and environmental destruction (pp. 1–23). London: Zed Books .
6.
Bhargava, M. (2002). Forests, people and state . Economic and Political Weekly, 37(43): 4440–46 .
7.
ENS (2009). Tribals to get rights over forest land from today . Express News Service, 12 July.
8.
FAO (2005). State of world’s forests. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations .
9.
Farooquee, N.A. , and Maikhuri, R.K. (2007). Role of the state on forests: Case of Uttarakhand . Economic and Political Weekly, 42 (35): 3537–40 .
10.
FSI (2005). State of Forest Report–2003. Dehradun: Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests .
11.
GOI (1988). National Forest Policy–1988. New Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests .
12.
GOI (2006). Report of National Forest Commission. New Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests .
13.
GOI (2007). The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006, Act No. 2 of 2007. New Delhi: Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India .
14.
Gopalkrishnan, S. (2008). Democratic control over natural resources . Yojana, 52: 10–13 .
15.
Grayson, A.J. , and Maynard, W.B. (eds) (1997). The World’s Forest-Rio+5: International Initiatives towards sustainable Management. Oxford: Commonwealth Forestry Association .
16.
Hebbar, R. (2006). Forest Bill 2005 and tribal areas: Case of Jharkhand . Economic and Political Weekly, 41(48): 4952–55 .
17.
IIFM, (n.d.). National Forest Policy Review, India. Bhopal: Indian Institute of Forest Management .
18.
Jeffery, R. , and Sunder, N. (1999). Introduction. In R. Jeffery and N. Sunder (eds), A new moral economy for India’s forests? Discourses of community and participation (pp. 15–55). New Delhi: Sage .
19.
Jewitt, S. (1995). Europe’s others? Forest policy and practices in colonial and post-colonial India . Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 13: 67–90 .
20.
Jodha, N.S. (2000). Joint management of forests: Small gains . Economic and Political Weekly, 30(50): 4396–99 .
21.
Joshi, G. (1983). Forest policy and tribal development: Problems of implementation, ecology and exploitation. In W. Farnandes and S. Kulkarni (eds), Towards a new forest policy: People’s rights and environmental needs (pp. 25–47). New Delhi: Indian Social Institute .
22.
Kameswari, V.L.V. (2002). Gendered communication and access to social space—Issues in forest management . Economic and Political Weekly, 37(8): 797–800 .
23.
Karat, B. (2008). Towards implementation of the Forest Rights Act . People’s Democracy, 32(5): 3 .
24.
Kothari (2010). Community Forest Resource Rights under the Forest Rights Act: Potential for Enhancing Conservation and Livelihoods, Community Forest Rights note, 11 March 2010, http://www.kalpavriksh.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout pp. 2–5.
25.
Kulkarni, S. (1983). The Forest Policy and the Forest Bill: A critique and suggestions for change. In W. Farnandes and S. Kulkarni (eds) Towards a new Forest Policy: People’s rights and environmental needs (pp. 88–101). New Delhi: Indian Social Institute .
26.
Leach, M. , Mearns, R. , and Scoones, I. (1999). Environmental entitlements: Dynamics and institutions in community based natural resource management . World Development, 27(2): 225–47 .
27.
LSS ( 1985 ). National Forest Policy. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat .
28.
Menon, A. (2007). Engaging with the law on Adivasi rights . Economic and Political Weekly42(24): 2239–42 .
29.
MoEF (1990). Involvement of Village Communities and Voluntary Agencies for Regeneration of Degraded Forest Lands, Letter No.6-21/89-F.P. New Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests .
30.
MoEF (2000). Guidelines for Strengthening of Joint Forest Management (JFM) Programme, Letter No. 22-8/2000-JFM (FPD). New Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests .
31.
Moosvi, A.R. (2004). Participatory Forest Management in Andhra Pradesh: A Study of its Political Economy and Sustainability. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
32.
MoTA (2009) Status Report on Implementation of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 [for the period ending 28 February 2009], Ministry of Tribal affairs, Government of India .
33.
MoTA (2010). Status Report on Implementation of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 [for the period ending 28 February 2010]. Ministry of Tribal affairs, Government of India .
34.
Nair, S.C. , and Jayal, N.D. (1991). Forest Policy: An Overview. New Delhi: Indian National Trust for Art and Culture Heritage .
35.
Poffenberger, M. , McGean, B. , and Khare, A. (2002). Communities sustaining India’s forests in twenty first century. In M. Poffenberger and B. McGean (eds), Village voices and forest choices: Joint forest management in India (pp. 18–55). New Delhi: Oxford University Press .
36.
Poffenberger, M. , and Singh, C. (2002). Communities and the state: Re-establishing the balance in Indian Forest Policy. In M. Poffenberger and B. McGean (eds), Village voices and forest choices: Joint forest management in India (pp. 56–85). New Delhi: Oxford University Press .
37.
Ramakrishnan, V. (2008). Hope and fear: The Forest Rights Act . Frontline, 25(4) : 4–8 .
38.
Ramnath, M. (2008). Surviving the Forest Rights Act: Between Scylla and Charybdis . Economic and Political Weekly, 43(9): 37–42 .
39.
Ravindranath, N.H. , Gadgil, M. , and Campbell, J. (2002). Ecological stabilization and community needs: Managing India’s Forests by Objective. In M. Poffenberger and B. McGean (eds), Village voices and forest choices: Joint forest management in India (p. 312). New Delhi: Oxford University Press .
40.
Ravindranath, N.H. (2007), Forests in India. The Hindu Survey of Environment, pp.13–18.
41.
RLEK (2009). The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006. Dehardun: Natraj Publishers; Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra .
42.
Sarin, M. (1995). Joint forest management in India: Achievements and unaddressed challenges . Unasylva, 180(46): 30–36 .
43.
Sarin, M. (1999). Policy Goals and JFM Practice: An Analysis of Institutional Arrangements and Outcomes. New Delhi: World Wide Fund for Nature, India .
44.
Sarin, M. (2002). From Conflict to Collaboration: Institutional Issues in Community Management. In M. Poffenberger and B. McGean (eds), Village voices and forest choices: Joint forest management in India (pp. 165–209). New Delhi: Oxford University Press .
45.
Sen, A. , and Lalhrietpui, E. (2006). Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill: A view from anthropology and call for dialogue . Economic and Political Weekly, 41(39): 4205–10 .
46.
Sarker, D. , and Das, N. (2002). Women’s participation in forestry: Some theoretical issues . Economic and Political Weekly, 37(43): 4407–12 .
47.
Saxena, N.C. (1999). Forest Policy in India. New Delhi: World Wide Fund for Nature, India .
48.
Sekhar, N.U. (2000). Decentralization of natural resource management: From state to co-management . Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43(1): 123–138 .
49.
Singhal, R. (n.d.). Changing models of forest governance in India: Evolution or revolution. Bhopal: Indian Institute of Forest Management , www.iifm.ac.in.
50.
Singh, C. (1986). Common property and common poverty: India’s forests, forest dwellers and the law. New Delhi: Oxford University Press .
51.
Sinha, H. (2006). People and forest: Unfolding the participation mystique. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company .
52.
Thin, N. , and Gardingen, D.V. (2004). Participatory forestry: Sharable lessons for better management of commons . Forest, Trees and Livelihood, 14: 229–242 .
53.
Upadhyay, S. (2003). JFM in India: Some legal concerns . Economic and Political Weekly, 38(35): 3629–31 .
54.
Upadhyay, S. (2008). Co-existence: Myths and Realities . Yojana, 52: 14–17 .
55.
Vasavada, S. , Misra, A. , and Bates, C. (1999). How many committees do I belong to? In R. Jeffery and N. Sundar (eds), A new moral economy for india’s forests? Discourses of community and participation (pp. 151–180). New Delhi: Sage .
56.
Venkatesan, V. (2008). On the fringes . Frontline, 25(4), Feb 29: 15–16 .
57.
Vira, B. (1995). Institutional changes in India’s forest sector 1976–1994: Reflection on state policy. Oxford Centre for Environment , Ethics and Society, Research Paper No. 5.
58.
Vira, B. (1999). Implementing Joint Forest Management in the field: Towards an understanding of the Community–Bureaucracy interface. In R. Jeffery and N. Sundar (eds), A new moral economy for india’s forests? Discourses of community and participation (pp. 254–275). New Delhi: Sage .
59.
Vira, B. (2005). Deconstructing the Harda Experience: Limits of bureaucratic participations . Economic and Political Weekly, 40(48): 5068–75 .
60.
WCED (1987). Our common future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
61.
Woolenberg E. , Campbell, B. , Shackleton, S. , Edmund, D. , and Shanley, P. (2004). Collective action and property rights for sustainable development: Collaborative management of forest. Collective Action and Property Rights for Sustainable Development, International Food Policy Research Institute , Focus 11, Brief 8 of 16 February, 1–2.
