Indigenous People “Vis-à-vis” Participatory Natural Resource Management

1214 The Indian Forester [December Indigenous people “vis-à-vis” participatory natural resource management 12152014]

They are guardians of biological diversity and sectors of the global society, and defending their cultural many of the areas of highest biological diversity on the diversity (Daes, 1996; Chakravarty et al., 2008 a, b). The planet are inhabited by indigenous peoples (Chakravarty recognition of this cultural phenomenon is relevant et al., 2008 b). ‘Biological 17’, the 17 countries that are when exploring the geographical links between cultural, home to more than two thirds of the Earth’s biological biological and agricultural diversities throughout the resources, are also the traditional territories of most of world which are major legacies of indigenous peoples the world’s indigenous peoples. Their lifestyles provide and small-farmer communities (Posey, 1999; Toledo, valuable lessons for the conservation and sustainable 2001). consumption of biological resources. Various studies Indigenous peoples exist in diverse social realities have shown that biological and cultural diversity are with different types of culture, political history and intricately linked: it is language that contains and livelihood forms. However, they share two fundamental transmits the ecological knowledge accumulated by features- their condition as subordinated peoples and indigenous people. The potential of indigenous people as their resistance efforts to preserve their cultural identity stewards of national and global natural resources and and historical heritage against cultural homogenization biodiversity is now increasingly acknowledged. The or assimilation (Daes, 1996). These peoples possess a World Summit on Sustainable Development in precious knowledge and for centuries have been Johannesburg, for instance, recently reaffirmed ‘the vital developing ways of living in harmony with their role of indigenous peoples in sustainable development’. environment. They have been recognized as major Indigenous peoples in general and indigenous women in players in ensuring sustainable development at the local particular have rich traditional knowledge systems level. Majority of them do not want to be isolated from (ecosystem management and technologies, medicinal development interventions but seek to benefit from plants, local crops) that are increasingly attracting the them while safeguarding their cultures, values and attention of commercial interests, yet they rarely get a institutions. Since they include very diverse groups of share of the benefits. peoples with differentiated poverty levels and other

Experience has shown that for any development to characteristics, further work is needed for development be successful, it has to include local people. In forestry, interventions to be better targeted.particularly in the developing world, this often applies to There are strong links between linguistic, indigenous people or forest communities living in or near biological and agricultural diversities at global scale, forest concession areas (Kumar and Kant, 2005). Over the expressed in the environmental knowledge and last decade, much has been done to develop management systems historically displayed by participatory approaches to natural resource indigenous peoples especially in those countries of the management. These approaches often involve different tropical belt which have particularly high concentrations ways of empowering local communities by allowing them of endemic languages, biota, crops and rural populations to be actively involved in planning and decision-making (Harmon, 2001). These countries have dominant processes. In addition to indigenous peoples living in proportion of the world’s forests and are repositories of close proximity to the forest, there are other actors, the majority of biological species, ecosystems and entities, organizations or stakeholders, who affect biogeographical regions. Most of them are in areas and/or are affected by the management of the natural where plant domestication first occurred and still resources (Kumar and Kant, 2005). Inevitably, managing maintain an important role in the creation, preservation the natural resources must be a collective effort that and enhancement of crop and animal genetic diversity involves all stakeholders (Castells, 1996). (Almekinders and Louwaars, 1999) Historical perspective Milestones

Indigenous peoples are historical peoples with The UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations territorialized cultures which developed long before the was established in 1982 which started drafting a colonial period who have become subordinated as a declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples in 1985 result of diverse forms of colonialism. Now-a-days, they (Trask, 1993). Then in 1992, Rio Declaration on are considered as emergent social subjects with their Environment and Development recognized in Principle own distinctive cultures, struggling for their survival, 22 that indigenous people and their communities and asserting their self-determination rights, searching to other local communities have a vital role in preserve and develop their cultural patrimonies, trying environmental management and development because to control their own decisions and governance, asking for of their knowledge and traditional practices and all a reorganization of their relations with the dominant countries need to recognize and duly support their

identity, culture and interests and enable their effective Involving indigenous people in natural resource participation in the achievement of sustainable managementdevelopment (www.un.org). Agenda 21 said that Participatory approach to managing natural traditional or indigenous methods should be studied and resource encounters a number of challenging tasks that considered wherever they have proved effective. must be faced. First is the identification of indigenous Convention on biological diversity talked about people who will ultimately affect the management of the respecting, preserving and maintaining knowledge, forest. Second, it is important that their roles are innovations and practices of indigenous and local properly and adequately understood. Third, it is also communities for the conservation and sustainable use of significant that the behavior of the indigenous people as biological diversity and promote their wider application they perform their purposeful actions must be with the approval and involvement of the holders of such understood and considered in making strategic decisions knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the about managing the forest or other natural resources. equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the Finally, it is also crucial that the interactions between and utilization of such knowledge, innovations and practices. among the indigenous communities are understood and The General Assembly of the United Nations proclaimed considered in planning for the management of the the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous natural resources (Hagmann et al., 2002). In view of the People (1995-2004) to strengthen international above, sustainable natural resource management needs cooperation for the solution of problems faced by to be participatory and should consider the interactions indigenous people. In 2001, UNESCO’s Universal between ecological dynamics and social dynamics (Kaul Declaration on cultural diversity recognized the and Efaw, 2004). The perceptions, views and concerns of contribution of traditional knowledge of indigenous all indigenous people must be accommodated and their peoples particularly with regard to environmental decision-making behaviours should be considered and protection and the management of natural resources integrated along with the ecological impacts of their and advised promoting synergies between modern actions (Agrawal, 2001; Kaul and Efaw, 2004).science and local knowledge (Anon., 2002 b).

The tradit ional top-down management Aspirations of indigenous people techniques were not solving the problem of over-

The aspirations of indigenous peoples, defined at exploitation and subsequent environmental degradation many meetings and conferences over the past decade in areas that were rich in natural resources (Kaul and summarized by International Fund for Agricultural Efaw, 2004). This developed the realization that prior to Development (IFAD), Rome are enlisted below (Anon. involvement of indigenous people in management of 2002 a). local natural resources, need is to understand their

attitudes towards the management systems. This has led - Recognition and respect of indigenous people’s to the development of community based natural rights. They want legal recognition of their resource management (CBNRM) with local communities collective, intergenerational rights to their and indigenous people in control of management of their territories that they have always inhabited and the local natural resources. CBNRM engages local people in natural resources that they have always used

which is essential for their continuing existence as resource management by incorporating their ideas, indigenous peoples. experiences, values and capabilities along with benefit

sharing (Uphoff, 1998). The principle of involving local - Respect of indigenous culture and knowledge people and indigenous communities is that their systems. Indigenous peoples are often proud of voluntary participation will likely create more interest in their diversity, their languages and their belief and conserving a forest or other natural resource they are knowledge systems. The validity of many of their

beliefs and practices are increasingly recognized associated, in fact more effectively than any than by non-indigenous peoples. government or non-government organizations (Nugent,

1993; Bardhan, 1993; Kaul and Efaw, 2004). This is - Right to meaningful participation. Indigenous because indigenous people have a greater peoples want the right to participate both as understanding of unique conditions in their area that contributors to and beneficiaries of their affect the natural resource which effect them to adapt countries’ development.their management techniques accordingly and more

- Autonomy of action. Indigenous peoples also want effectively than any other externally controlled

more autonomy in managing their own affairs, management plan (Agrawal and Gibson, 1999). Further

including some decisional authority over activities the community participated management through local

undertaken on their lands.


They are guardians of biological diversity and sectors of the global society, and defending their cultural many of the areas of highest biological diversity on the diversity (Daes, 1996; Chakravarty et al., 2008 a, b). The planet are inhabited by indigenous peoples (Chakravarty recognition of this cultural phenomenon is relevant et al., 2008 b). ‘Biological 17’, the 17 countries that are when exploring the geographical links between cultural, home to more than two thirds of the Earth’s biological biological and agricultural diversities throughout the resources, are also the traditional territories of most of world which are major legacies of indigenous peoples the world’s indigenous peoples. Their lifestyles provide and small-farmer communities (Posey, 1999; Toledo, valuable lessons for the conservation and sustainable 2001). consumption of biological resources. Various studies Indigenous peoples exist in diverse social realities have shown that biological and cultural diversity are with different types of culture, political history and intricately linked: it is language that contains and livelihood forms. However, they share two fundamental transmits the ecological knowledge accumulated by features- their condition as subordinated peoples and indigenous people. The potential of indigenous people as their resistance efforts to preserve their cultural identity stewards of national and global natural resources and and historical heritage against cultural homogenization biodiversity is now increasingly acknowledged. The or assimilation (Daes, 1996). These peoples possess a World Summit on Sustainable Development in precious knowledge and for centuries have been Johannesburg, for instance, recently reaffirmed ‘the vital developing ways of living in harmony with their role of indigenous peoples in sustainable development’. environment. They have been recognized as major Indigenous peoples in general and indigenous women in players in ensuring sustainable development at the local particular have rich traditional knowledge systems level. Majority of them do not want to be isolated from (ecosystem management and technologies, medicinal development interventions but seek to benefit from plants, local crops) that are increasingly attracting the them while safeguarding their cultures, values and attention of commercial interests, yet they rarely get a institutions. Since they include very diverse groups of share of the benefits. peoples with differentiated poverty levels and other

Experience has shown that for any development to characteristics, further work is needed for development be successful, it has to include local people. In forestry, interventions to be better targeted.particularly in the developing world, this often applies to There are strong links between linguistic, indigenous people or forest communities living in or near biological and agricultural diversities at global scale, forest concession areas (Kumar and Kant, 2005). Over the expressed in the environmental knowledge and last decade, much has been done to develop management systems historically displayed by participatory approaches to natural resource indigenous peoples especially in those countries of the management. These approaches often involve different tropical belt which have particularly high concentrations ways of empowering local communities by allowing them of endemic languages, biota, crops and rural populations to be actively involved in planning and decision-making (Harmon, 2001). These countries have dominant processes. In addition to indigenous peoples living in proportion of the world’s forests and are repositories of close proximity to the forest, there are other actors, the majority of biological species, ecosystems and entities, organizations or stakeholders, who affect biogeographical regions. Most of them are in areas and/or are affected by the management of the natural where plant domestication first occurred and still resources (Kumar and Kant, 2005). Inevitably, managing maintain an important role in the creation, preservation the natural resources must be a collective effort that and enhancement of crop and animal genetic diversity involves all stakeholders (Castells, 1996). (Almekinders and Louwaars, 1999) Historical perspective Milestones

Indigenous peoples are historical peoples with The UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations territorialized cultures which developed long before the was established in 1982 which started drafting a colonial period who have become subordinated as a declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples in 1985 result of diverse forms of colonialism. Now-a-days, they (Trask, 1993). Then in 1992, Rio Declaration on are considered as emergent social subjects with their Environment and Development recognized in Principle own distinctive cultures, struggling for their survival, 22 that indigenous people and their communities and asserting their self-determination rights, searching to other local communities have a vital role in preserve and develop their cultural patrimonies, trying environmental management and development because to control their own decisions and governance, asking for of their knowledge and traditional practices and all a reorganization of their relations with the dominant countries need to recognize and duly support their

identity, culture and interests and enable their effective Involving indigenous people in natural resource participation in the achievement of sustainable managementdevelopment (www.un.org). Agenda 21 said that Participatory approach to managing natural traditional or indigenous methods should be studied and resource encounters a number of challenging tasks that considered wherever they have proved effective. must be faced. First is the identification of indigenous Convention on biological diversity talked about people who will ultimately affect the management of the respecting, preserving and maintaining knowledge, forest. Second, it is important that their roles are innovations and practices of indigenous and local properly and adequately understood. Third, it is also communities for the conservation and sustainable use of significant that the behavior of the indigenous people as biological diversity and promote their wider application they perform their purposeful actions must be with the approval and involvement of the holders of such understood and considered in making strategic decisions knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the about managing the forest or other natural resources. equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the Finally, it is also crucial that the interactions between and utilization of such knowledge, innovations and practices. among the indigenous communities are understood and The General Assembly of the United Nations proclaimed considered in planning for the management of the the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous natural resources (Hagmann et al., 2002). In view of the People (1995-2004) to strengthen international above, sustainable natural resource management needs cooperation for the solution of problems faced by to be participatory and should consider the interactions indigenous people. In 2001, UNESCO’s Universal between ecological dynamics and social dynamics (Kaul Declaration on cultural diversity recognized the and Efaw, 2004). The perceptions, views and concerns of contribution of traditional knowledge of indigenous all indigenous people must be accommodated and their peoples particularly with regard to environmental decision-making behaviours should be considered and protection and the management of natural resources integrated along with the ecological impacts of their and advised promoting synergies between modern actions (Agrawal, 2001; Kaul and Efaw, 2004).science and local knowledge (Anon., 2002 b).

The tradit ional top-down management Aspirations of indigenous people techniques were not solving the problem of over-

The aspirations of indigenous peoples, defined at exploitation and subsequent environmental degradation many meetings and conferences over the past decade in areas that were rich in natural resources (Kaul and summarized by International Fund for Agricultural Efaw, 2004). This developed the realization that prior to Development (IFAD), Rome are enlisted below (Anon. involvement of indigenous people in management of 2002 a). local natural resources, need is to understand their

attitudes towards the management systems. This has led - Recognition and respect of indigenous people’s to the development of community based natural rights. They want legal recognition of their resource management (CBNRM) with local communities collective, intergenerational rights to their and indigenous people in control of management of their territories that they have always inhabited and the local natural resources. CBNRM engages local people in natural resources that they have always used

which is essential for their continuing existence as resource management by incorporating their ideas, indigenous peoples. experiences, values and capabilities along with benefit

sharing (Uphoff, 1998). The principle of involving local - Respect of indigenous culture and knowledge people and indigenous communities is that their systems. Indigenous peoples are often proud of voluntary participation will likely create more interest in their diversity, their languages and their belief and conserving a forest or other natural resource they are knowledge systems. The validity of many of their

beliefs and practices are increasingly recognized associated, in fact more effectively than any than by non-indigenous peoples. government or non-government organizations (Nugent,

1993; Bardhan, 1993; Kaul and Efaw, 2004). This is - Right to meaningful participation. Indigenous because indigenous people have a greater peoples want the right to participate both as understanding of unique conditions in their area that contributors to and beneficiaries of their affect the natural resource which effect them to adapt countries’ development.their management techniques accordingly and more

- Autonomy of action. Indigenous peoples also want effectively than any other externally controlled

more autonomy in managing their own affairs, management plan (Agrawal and Gibson, 1999). Further

including some decisional authority over activities the community participated management through local

undertaken on their lands.


institutional arrangements including customs and social for better natural resource management (Yadama, 1997; conventions enhances the use efficiency of natural Ligon and Narain, 1999).resources sustainably and benefit sharing equitably. Participatory management and sustainabilityEquitable benefit sharing becomes a reality through local

Awareness of the need to improve natural collective action for formulating unanimous resource

resource management has been growing around the allocation rules/guidelines among the stakeholders

world. While the failure of highly centralized government (Chakravarty et al., 2008 b). This approach for

bureaucracies to incorporate the concerns of local management of common property resources by the

communities in natural resource management is being stakeholders is an acceptable system for overcoming the

increasingly recognized, the perception that indigenous ‘tragedy of the commons’ and is being applied in many

people collectively manage these resources in a countries (Jodha, 1986).

sustainable manner is growing (Ostrom, 1990; Kaul and There are four factors that influences indigenous Efaw, 2004). Especially in the developing world where

people based natural resource management. These are natural resource degradation has a significant impact on attributes of the resource, attributes of the management local livelihoods, decentralization of state governance group, attributes of the institutional arrangements and systems has received considerable attention (Kaul and the external influences (Vira, 1999). Community is a Efaw, 2004). A consequence of such interest in local diverse entity and their access to different sources of management is the establishment of a number knowledge and understanding of the collective action community groups for the management of common pool differ. It is imperative that their perceptions of the resources like fish, forests, wildlife, and watersheds the problem as well as the responses needed to address the world over (Pretty, 2003). Participation of indigenous problem are likely to differ among themselves (Adams et people is through three types of resource-management. al., 2003). Perception varies with age, gender, social and They are rule formulation (planning), rule enforcement economic status or due to differences in individual (implementation) and resource maintenance. The member’s values, beliefs, ideas and cultural norms of ‘nature of involvement’ defined the manner of user indigenous groups (Naik, 1997). Members involved do participation in the resource management, whether not share a uniform understanding of the problem and direct participation or indirect; if indirect, whether approaches needed to address it and policies that fail to through elected representatives or through local leaders. take into account such differences can generate conflicts The 'level of involvement' was used to understand the and lead to unintended outcomes in equity (Hildyard et extent of people’s involvement - whether voluntary or al., 2001). This seems to be one of the most important induced (through material incentives); if voluntary, reasons for difficulties facing successful indigenous whether involvement in formulating policy or only to people based efforts, especially in developing countries implement decisions (Sekher, 2001).(Agrawal and Gibson, 1999).

An important dimension of indigenous people Differences in knowledge, understanding, based participatory resource management is the manner

perceptions and priorities exist not only among different in which the rules governing resource utilization are sections of the community but also between programme formulated and the process organized (Kaul and Efaw, planners and community members (Sundar, 2000; 2004; Chakravarty et al., 2008 a, b). Local organizations Sekher, 2001). In management actions where such are an important mechanism for generating and focusing differences dominated, collective action efforts simply participatory management of community resources. failed. An understanding of different interpretations of Accepting this, the present thrust in development debate key issues of a collective action by local people is is on the role of local organizations, both community-essential. This approach clear the differences by merging based grassroots initiatives and externally induced multiple interests, thus managing conflicts of interests grassroots-focused organizations, in the development and a majority of members positively believe in the process (Ostrom,1990). Participatory resource collective effort towards natural resource conservation management involving indigenous people, thus, involves which ensures success (Varughese and Ostrom, 2001). a process of organized management (Kaul and Efaw, Appropriate information provided to the members could 2004). There are substantial variations between narrow gaps in their knowledge and understanding of the participatory systems which preclude generalizations collective action issue and its impacts on natural about membership definitions, access and appropriation resources. For example, information on how forest rights and member obligations. One of the prerequisites improvement by involving indigenous people could help for successful collective action is indigenous people’s conserve soil and water could help in motivating them active and effective participation at various levels of

resource management (Lise, 2000). Information on how Australia, in the jungles of the Amazon basin, across various members of a group perceive collective action North America, in the lands of Taiwan, the plains of Sudan and what factors influence those perceptions, however, and the vastness of the Indian subcontinent, indigenous is critical to understand the performance of CBNRM. In peoples continue to inhabit territories long occupied by the face of growing importance of community their ancestors (Manuel, 1979). In these areas tribal involvement in natural resource governance concerned peoples continue ancestral practices. Tribal areas, the agencies and policy makers need to develop pragmatic homelands of indigenous peoples are now the ‘green’ resource management strategies. areas of the world though they were once thought to be

areas inhospitable to human life. Indigenous peoples Resource sustainability depends on continuity of have, by virtue of their ways of life, protected and the resource appropriation pattern determined by the preserved lands, water, plants and animals that system. Sustainability is a continual value-dependent, represent the last major undeveloped resources in the political and social negotiation process that cannot be world. The orderly use, development and management determined by outsiders for the insiders. Sustainable of natural resources must hinge on the cooperative and natural resource management and even development in respectful relations between indigenous, developing general can be seen as a social learning process in which and industrialized peoples through their respective the goal is to increase human capacity to solve problems governments. Here are some examples of natural and adapt to changing conditions i.e. ‘adaptive capacity’ resource management by indigenous people and the (Holling et al., 1998). In this framework, sustainable problems faced.natural resource management is decided less by

technical expertise than by learning and negotiation In Africa, the San or Bushmen were the only among stakeholders. Collective ‘active adaptive’ capacity inhabitants of the semi-arid Kalahari area in southern is the key determinant for sustainability. Sustainability of Africa earlier. Living in family groups as hunter-gatherers the collective management practices assumes primary on their territorial areas, they were semi-nomadic and significance in any endeavor to protect and preserve a moved only when their water source was drying up. ‘common property resource’. When food became scarce in some areas, they assisted

each other by allowing other San tribes to visit their Sustainability may be viewed as the continued and areas. They devised ways to access and protect water, effective administration of the resource leading to asset without depleting its scarce reserves. When new settlers creation benefiting the entire indigenous community. appeared with their livestock, the fragile balance the San Implied in this is sustainability of the physical resource had established with their environment was destroyed and of the collective management system (Runge, 1986). and their custom of sharing dispossessed them. New Sustainability of the existing management process may settlers introduced new technologies such as boreholes, be analyzed, first by examining the indigenous people’s pumping masses of water from deep within the ground. capacity to influence the decisions affecting the resource The water and food resources were depleted. Finally, the management. Secondly, the sustainability may be San were dispossessed from their land and designated as analyzed by studying the local institutional capacity to nomadic (Songorwa, 1999).support and sustain the indigenous people’s cooperation

in maintaining the resource. Studying the people’s In India, there are various examples showing how perception of their role in influencing/making policy tribal people have valued their natural resources. The decisions (regulatory decision-making) for managing the indigenous communities shared community level norms resource is critical for natural resource management. which have helped to promote conservation in different This creates interlink between the organized ways. First, norms specifically prohibit some actions. In participation, natural resource management and its Rajasthan, the 'Bishnois' have strong norms against the sustainability (Sekher, 2001). The United Nations killing of wild animal species such as black buck (Sekher, Programme of Action following the 1992 Rio Declaration- 2001). Women belonging to ‘Juang’ and ‘Saora’ tribal Agenda 21 recognizes indigenous peoples as a ‘major communities in Orissa follow strong norms about the group’ stating that efforts to implement sustainable timing and season for collecting non-timber forest development should recognize, accommodate, promote products (Conroy et al., 2002). Many tribal groups do not and strengthen the role of indigenous peoples and their cut various tree species like khejri (Prosopis cineraria), sal communities. (Shorea robusta) and mahua (Madhuca indica). There is

also a concept of sacred groves and area dedicated to a Management of natural resources and problems faced religious deity in various parts of North-East India, by indigenous peopleRajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and other states in India. But

In Northern Europe, throughout the continent of


institutional arrangements including customs and social for better natural resource management (Yadama, 1997; conventions enhances the use efficiency of natural Ligon and Narain, 1999).resources sustainably and benefit sharing equitably. Participatory management and sustainabilityEquitable benefit sharing becomes a reality through local

Awareness of the need to improve natural collective action for formulating unanimous resource

resource management has been growing around the allocation rules/guidelines among the stakeholders

world. While the failure of highly centralized government (Chakravarty et al., 2008 b). This approach for

bureaucracies to incorporate the concerns of local management of common property resources by the

communities in natural resource management is being stakeholders is an acceptable system for overcoming the

increasingly recognized, the perception that indigenous ‘tragedy of the commons’ and is being applied in many

people collectively manage these resources in a countries (Jodha, 1986).

sustainable manner is growing (Ostrom, 1990; Kaul and There are four factors that influences indigenous Efaw, 2004). Especially in the developing world where

people based natural resource management. These are natural resource degradation has a significant impact on attributes of the resource, attributes of the management local livelihoods, decentralization of state governance group, attributes of the institutional arrangements and systems has received considerable attention (Kaul and the external influences (Vira, 1999). Community is a Efaw, 2004). A consequence of such interest in local diverse entity and their access to different sources of management is the establishment of a number knowledge and understanding of the collective action community groups for the management of common pool differ. It is imperative that their perceptions of the resources like fish, forests, wildlife, and watersheds the problem as well as the responses needed to address the world over (Pretty, 2003). Participation of indigenous problem are likely to differ among themselves (Adams et people is through three types of resource-management. al., 2003). Perception varies with age, gender, social and They are rule formulation (planning), rule enforcement economic status or due to differences in individual (implementation) and resource maintenance. The member’s values, beliefs, ideas and cultural norms of ‘nature of involvement’ defined the manner of user indigenous groups (Naik, 1997). Members involved do participation in the resource management, whether not share a uniform understanding of the problem and direct participation or indirect; if indirect, whether approaches needed to address it and policies that fail to through elected representatives or through local leaders. take into account such differences can generate conflicts The 'level of involvement' was used to understand the and lead to unintended outcomes in equity (Hildyard et extent of people’s involvement - whether voluntary or al., 2001). This seems to be one of the most important induced (through material incentives); if voluntary, reasons for difficulties facing successful indigenous whether involvement in formulating policy or only to people based efforts, especially in developing countries implement decisions (Sekher, 2001).(Agrawal and Gibson, 1999).

An important dimension of indigenous people Differences in knowledge, understanding, based participatory resource management is the manner

perceptions and priorities exist not only among different in which the rules governing resource utilization are sections of the community but also between programme formulated and the process organized (Kaul and Efaw, planners and community members (Sundar, 2000; 2004; Chakravarty et al., 2008 a, b). Local organizations Sekher, 2001). In management actions where such are an important mechanism for generating and focusing differences dominated, collective action efforts simply participatory management of community resources. failed. An understanding of different interpretations of Accepting this, the present thrust in development debate key issues of a collective action by local people is is on the role of local organizations, both community-essential. This approach clear the differences by merging based grassroots initiatives and externally induced multiple interests, thus managing conflicts of interests grassroots-focused organizations, in the development and a majority of members positively believe in the process (Ostrom,1990). Participatory resource collective effort towards natural resource conservation management involving indigenous people, thus, involves which ensures success (Varughese and Ostrom, 2001). a process of organized management (Kaul and Efaw, Appropriate information provided to the members could 2004). There are substantial variations between narrow gaps in their knowledge and understanding of the participatory systems which preclude generalizations collective action issue and its impacts on natural about membership definitions, access and appropriation resources. For example, information on how forest rights and member obligations. One of the prerequisites improvement by involving indigenous people could help for successful collective action is indigenous people’s conserve soil and water could help in motivating them active and effective participation at various levels of

resource management (Lise, 2000). Information on how Australia, in the jungles of the Amazon basin, across various members of a group perceive collective action North America, in the lands of Taiwan, the plains of Sudan and what factors influence those perceptions, however, and the vastness of the Indian subcontinent, indigenous is critical to understand the performance of CBNRM. In peoples continue to inhabit territories long occupied by the face of growing importance of community their ancestors (Manuel, 1979). In these areas tribal involvement in natural resource governance concerned peoples continue ancestral practices. Tribal areas, the agencies and policy makers need to develop pragmatic homelands of indigenous peoples are now the ‘green’ resource management strategies. areas of the world though they were once thought to be

areas inhospitable to human life. Indigenous peoples Resource sustainability depends on continuity of have, by virtue of their ways of life, protected and the resource appropriation pattern determined by the preserved lands, water, plants and animals that system. Sustainability is a continual value-dependent, represent the last major undeveloped resources in the political and social negotiation process that cannot be world. The orderly use, development and management determined by outsiders for the insiders. Sustainable of natural resources must hinge on the cooperative and natural resource management and even development in respectful relations between indigenous, developing general can be seen as a social learning process in which and industrialized peoples through their respective the goal is to increase human capacity to solve problems governments. Here are some examples of natural and adapt to changing conditions i.e. ‘adaptive capacity’ resource management by indigenous people and the (Holling et al., 1998). In this framework, sustainable problems faced.natural resource management is decided less by

technical expertise than by learning and negotiation In Africa, the San or Bushmen were the only among stakeholders. Collective ‘active adaptive’ capacity inhabitants of the semi-arid Kalahari area in southern is the key determinant for sustainability. Sustainability of Africa earlier. Living in family groups as hunter-gatherers the collective management practices assumes primary on their territorial areas, they were semi-nomadic and significance in any endeavor to protect and preserve a moved only when their water source was drying up. ‘common property resource’. When food became scarce in some areas, they assisted

each other by allowing other San tribes to visit their Sustainability may be viewed as the continued and areas. They devised ways to access and protect water, effective administration of the resource leading to asset without depleting its scarce reserves. When new settlers creation benefiting the entire indigenous community. appeared with their livestock, the fragile balance the San Implied in this is sustainability of the physical resource had established with their environment was destroyed and of the collective management system (Runge, 1986). and their custom of sharing dispossessed them. New Sustainability of the existing management process may settlers introduced new technologies such as boreholes, be analyzed, first by examining the indigenous people’s pumping masses of water from deep within the ground. capacity to influence the decisions affecting the resource The water and food resources were depleted. Finally, the management. Secondly, the sustainability may be San were dispossessed from their land and designated as analyzed by studying the local institutional capacity to nomadic (Songorwa, 1999).support and sustain the indigenous people’s cooperation

in maintaining the resource. Studying the people’s In India, there are various examples showing how perception of their role in influencing/making policy tribal people have valued their natural resources. The decisions (regulatory decision-making) for managing the indigenous communities shared community level norms resource is critical for natural resource management. which have helped to promote conservation in different This creates interlink between the organized ways. First, norms specifically prohibit some actions. In participation, natural resource management and its Rajasthan, the 'Bishnois' have strong norms against the sustainability (Sekher, 2001). The United Nations killing of wild animal species such as black buck (Sekher, Programme of Action following the 1992 Rio Declaration- 2001). Women belonging to ‘Juang’ and ‘Saora’ tribal Agenda 21 recognizes indigenous peoples as a ‘major communities in Orissa follow strong norms about the group’ stating that efforts to implement sustainable timing and season for collecting non-timber forest development should recognize, accommodate, promote products (Conroy et al., 2002). Many tribal groups do not and strengthen the role of indigenous peoples and their cut various tree species like khejri (Prosopis cineraria), sal communities. (Shorea robusta) and mahua (Madhuca indica). There is

also a concept of sacred groves and area dedicated to a Management of natural resources and problems faced religious deity in various parts of North-East India, by indigenous peopleRajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and other states in India. But

In Northern Europe, throughout the continent of

Indigenous people “vis-à-vis” participatory natural resource management 12192014]

with increased urbanization and population pressure prevent an individual speaking on the such areas are being forcibly converted in many parts for management of certain resources or areas of land development activities. Also, the sacred species are and water.being cut in spite of protests by indigenous people - Natural resource management meetings can be (Gurung, 1992). intimidating situations for indigenous people.

In Latin America, the Amazon river basin, a - NRM might be irrelevant or of low importance in rainforest extending into nine Latin American countries is comparison to other issues that they face on a home to over 300 indigenous peoples. Traditionally they daily basis.have been maintaining natural resources on a

- There can be fundamental differences in the way sustainable basis, harvesting only as much as needed on

indigenous people relate to land and water and a daily basis. The governments of Brazil, Ecuador and

make decisions compared to non-indigenous Peru have started to use the land and resources to

decision-makers.increase the income of their countries and transnational

- Like many regional natural resource management, corporations extract raw material such as gold, tin, iron many indigenous leaders are over-worked. They and oil. Other major development projects include get invited to participate on many committees construction of dams and roads. Because of such covering a range of issues such as health, intensive exploitation, millions of acres of forest have education, employment and justice. been cleared or destroyed. Indigenous people are still

struggling to preserve their lands (www.wateryear2003. Strategies and the way forwardorg). Indigenous people need to be represented on

In Thailand, according to the Karen people, living in regional decision-making committees (Chakravarty et al., Northern Thailand, ‘if you eat from the forest, you must 2008 a, b). Regional natural resource management protect it, and if you drink from the river, you must should ask the regional indigenous community to help conserve it.’ Their land use strategy is based upon the establish an appropriate process for gaining indigenous maintenance of four categories of land, distinguished by input to natural resource management planning. In some their use, location and pattern of ownership: rice paddy areas, there is need to have more than one indigenous fields, swidden cultivation, community forest and person on the committee to adequately represent the watershed forest. Fields are cultivated for only one or community’s interests. Indigenous representation two seasons before being returned to fallow. Cultivation should be undertaken as a matter of protocol and respect of plots is rotated every 7-10 years. Thus, the Karen for indigenous people, while recognizing the limitations people maintain a high level of biological diversity – even arising from placing such responsibility on any the fallow plots are used for supplying medicine plants, indigenous person who may not have authority to speak food in the form of mushrooms, tubers and shoots. But on some matters. The regional plan should acknowledge today, commercial plantations and state policies indigenous interests and relationships to land and water encourage permanent and intensive agriculture, and consider these matters in the plan which might be shortening fallows and depleting soils. This model of achieved through a section on indigenous culture and agriculture has had negative impacts and the fields and land management. The indigenous people’s rights to tropical forest has been replaced by Imperata cylindrica their ancestral lands or related resources should be grasslands. It has had adverse effect on crop yields, often strengthened by incorporating indigenous knowledge resulting in the field being abandoned (Conroy et al., systems during preparation and implementation of land 2002). management plans (Chakravarty et al., 2008 b).

Assessing and developing mechanisms to compensate Key challengesindigenous peoples for the environmental services

There are number of challenges which were (carbon sequestration, watershed protection and bio-

identified and needs to be addressed for smooth, active diversity) that they provide to the world at large. These

and efficient participation of indigenous people in mechanisms will use market instruments to assign a

natural resource engagement (Maffi, 2001; Anon., value to environmental services (Agrawal and Gibson,

2004).1999).

- It is often very difficult to identify the indigenous Periodical review and accountability is essential in

people who have the right to speak for a particular natural resource management. This is also crucial for the

resource or area of country.kind of broad-based development needed to reduce

- There may be family hierarchies or obligations that poverty. Indigenous societies are often more open than

mainstream ones (especially in Asia), even their that they can feel the benefit of participation. Developing institutions tend to be elitist and dominated by men. and strengthening indigenous people’s organizations is Where the governance structure does not guarantee crucial for sustainable development. Moreover, adequate representation of women, a particularly strong substantial spin-off benefits are generated by reinforcing focus on awareness building and sensitivity training is the participation of the communities themselves in essential to encourage local community groups to get decision-making processes and in negotiations with adequate representation (Agrawal, 2001). Indigenous outside parties, whether local, national or international people are usually the least powerful among the authorities; the private sector or development agencies different parties interested in conservation. (Anon., 2002 a). Finally genuine inclusion of indigenous Conservation requires, therefore, that more strenuous people is essential in all the processes of natural resource efforts are made to channel greater authority and power management (Chakravarty et al., 2008 b). It should not toward local people. Only then can indigenous people merely be don’t to follow some policy or directive of form effective checks against arbitrary actions by government (Kaul and Efaw, 2004).governments and other actors. Networked structures, Conclusionbringing together the resources of several communities

Indigenous people and their communities have a are also important. They may prove far more effective in

historical relationship with their lands and are generally resolving intercommunity conflicts in comparison to

descendants of the original inhabitants of such lands. distant, time-consuming legal mechanisms that are, in

They have developed over many generations a holistic any case, biased against marginal groups. They may also

traditional scientific knowledge of their lands, natural be useful in addressing challenges from members of local

resources and environment. Their ability to participate elites to community-based conservation (Kumar and

fully in sustainable development practices on their lands Kant, 2005).

has tended to be limited as a result of factors of an Different interests, especially those that are economic, social and historical nature. Their indigenous

usually marginal should be represented in decision- knowledge needs to be supplemented. Local people making and mechanisms should be made to ensure that need to be made aware of depletion dangers and the outcomes of involving indigenous people in natural commercial potential of natural resource management. resource management should be of multifarious use and It will be a positive step towards effective natural affect the indigenous people in a more positive way so resource management.

LFkkuh; yksxksa ds lkFk&lkFk lgHkkfxrk izkd̀frd lalk/u izca/uXkksiky 'kqDyk] fnO; fuukn dksy rFkk lqfer pØorhZ

Lkkjka'kns'kt yksx izkd̀frd lalk/uksa ij vkfJr jgrs gSa vkSj lzksrksa ds ckjs esa tkudkjh j[krs gSaA LFkkuh; leqnk;ksa }kjk izkd̀frd lalk/uksa dk

laj{k.k djus ls mudh vkthfodk lqjf{kr jgrh gS vkSj lkFk gh ikfjra=k dh j{kk gksrh gSA lalk/uksa dh fujarjrk] LFkkuh; yksxksa ds Kku vkfJrrk laLd̀fr ekudksa rFkk mi;kstu ij fuHkZj gksrh gSA orZeku izys[k esa ns'kt yksxksa dh leL;kvksa vkSj pqukSfr;ksa ij fopkj fd;k x;k gSA blesa lq>ko fn;s x;s gSa fd izkd̀frd lalk/uksa ds laj{k.k gsrq LFkkuh; yksxksa vkSj ljdkj ds chp lgHkkfxrk fdl izdkj fodflr dh tk ldrh gS ftlls ns'kt yksxksa dk mRFkku Hkh gks ldsA vf/dka'k ns'kt yksx lhekard {ks=kksa esa vHkkoiw.kZ thou O;rhr djrs gSa blfy, muds fy, lrr~ fodkl dk ekxZ iz'kLr djuk Hkh vko';d gSA bl fn'kk esa gky gh esa dkiQh iz;kl fd;s x;s gSA ;n~;fi bl fn'kk esa dkiQh dqN fd;k x;k gSA fdUrq vHkh cgqr dqN djuk vko';d gSA

ReferencesAdams W.M., Brockington D., Dyson J. and Vira B. (2003). Managing tragedies: understanding conflict over common pool resources.

Science, 302: 1915-1916.Agrawal A. (2001). Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Development, 29: 1649-1672.Agrawal A. and Gibson C. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World

Development, 27: 629-649.Almekinders C. and Louwaars N. (1999). Farmers’ Seed Production. New Approaches and Practices, Intermediate Technology Publications.

London, UK.Anon. (2001). Rural Poverty Report 2001- the Challenge of Ending Rural Poverty. The International Fund for Agricultural development,

Rome. Available at http://www.ifad.org/poverty.Anon. (2002 a). Valuing Diversity in Sustainable Development. International Fund for Agricultural Development, Rome.Anon. (2000 b). About indigenous peoples: frequently asked questions’, http://www.undp.org/csopp/CSO/ NewFiles/ipaboutfaqs.htmlAnon. (2004). Ways to improve community engagement- Working with Indigenous knowledge in natural resource management.

Commonwealth of Australia.

1218 The Indian Forester [December

Indigenous people “vis-à-vis” participatory natural resource management 12192014]

with increased urbanization and population pressure prevent an individual speaking on the such areas are being forcibly converted in many parts for management of certain resources or areas of land development activities. Also, the sacred species are and water.being cut in spite of protests by indigenous people - Natural resource management meetings can be (Gurung, 1992). intimidating situations for indigenous people.

In Latin America, the Amazon river basin, a - NRM might be irrelevant or of low importance in rainforest extending into nine Latin American countries is comparison to other issues that they face on a home to over 300 indigenous peoples. Traditionally they daily basis.have been maintaining natural resources on a

- There can be fundamental differences in the way sustainable basis, harvesting only as much as needed on

indigenous people relate to land and water and a daily basis. The governments of Brazil, Ecuador and

make decisions compared to non-indigenous Peru have started to use the land and resources to

decision-makers.increase the income of their countries and transnational

- Like many regional natural resource management, corporations extract raw material such as gold, tin, iron many indigenous leaders are over-worked. They and oil. Other major development projects include get invited to participate on many committees construction of dams and roads. Because of such covering a range of issues such as health, intensive exploitation, millions of acres of forest have education, employment and justice. been cleared or destroyed. Indigenous people are still

struggling to preserve their lands (www.wateryear2003. Strategies and the way forwardorg). Indigenous people need to be represented on

In Thailand, according to the Karen people, living in regional decision-making committees (Chakravarty et al., Northern Thailand, ‘if you eat from the forest, you must 2008 a, b). Regional natural resource management protect it, and if you drink from the river, you must should ask the regional indigenous community to help conserve it.’ Their land use strategy is based upon the establish an appropriate process for gaining indigenous maintenance of four categories of land, distinguished by input to natural resource management planning. In some their use, location and pattern of ownership: rice paddy areas, there is need to have more than one indigenous fields, swidden cultivation, community forest and person on the committee to adequately represent the watershed forest. Fields are cultivated for only one or community’s interests. Indigenous representation two seasons before being returned to fallow. Cultivation should be undertaken as a matter of protocol and respect of plots is rotated every 7-10 years. Thus, the Karen for indigenous people, while recognizing the limitations people maintain a high level of biological diversity – even arising from placing such responsibility on any the fallow plots are used for supplying medicine plants, indigenous person who may not have authority to speak food in the form of mushrooms, tubers and shoots. But on some matters. The regional plan should acknowledge today, commercial plantations and state policies indigenous interests and relationships to land and water encourage permanent and intensive agriculture, and consider these matters in the plan which might be shortening fallows and depleting soils. This model of achieved through a section on indigenous culture and agriculture has had negative impacts and the fields and land management. The indigenous people’s rights to tropical forest has been replaced by Imperata cylindrica their ancestral lands or related resources should be grasslands. It has had adverse effect on crop yields, often strengthened by incorporating indigenous knowledge resulting in the field being abandoned (Conroy et al., systems during preparation and implementation of land 2002). management plans (Chakravarty et al., 2008 b).

Assessing and developing mechanisms to compensate Key challengesindigenous peoples for the environmental services

There are number of challenges which were (carbon sequestration, watershed protection and bio-

identified and needs to be addressed for smooth, active diversity) that they provide to the world at large. These

and efficient participation of indigenous people in mechanisms will use market instruments to assign a

natural resource engagement (Maffi, 2001; Anon., value to environmental services (Agrawal and Gibson,

2004).1999).

- It is often very difficult to identify the indigenous Periodical review and accountability is essential in

people who have the right to speak for a particular natural resource management. This is also crucial for the

resource or area of country.kind of broad-based development needed to reduce

- There may be family hierarchies or obligations that poverty. Indigenous societies are often more open than

mainstream ones (especially in Asia), even their that they can feel the benefit of participation. Developing institutions tend to be elitist and dominated by men. and strengthening indigenous people’s organizations is Where the governance structure does not guarantee crucial for sustainable development. Moreover, adequate representation of women, a particularly strong substantial spin-off benefits are generated by reinforcing focus on awareness building and sensitivity training is the participation of the communities themselves in essential to encourage local community groups to get decision-making processes and in negotiations with adequate representation (Agrawal, 2001). Indigenous outside parties, whether local, national or international people are usually the least powerful among the authorities; the private sector or development agencies different parties interested in conservation. (Anon., 2002 a). Finally genuine inclusion of indigenous Conservation requires, therefore, that more strenuous people is essential in all the processes of natural resource efforts are made to channel greater authority and power management (Chakravarty et al., 2008 b). It should not toward local people. Only then can indigenous people merely be don’t to follow some policy or directive of form effective checks against arbitrary actions by government (Kaul and Efaw, 2004).governments and other actors. Networked structures, Conclusionbringing together the resources of several communities

Indigenous people and their communities have a are also important. They may prove far more effective in

historical relationship with their lands and are generally resolving intercommunity conflicts in comparison to

descendants of the original inhabitants of such lands. distant, time-consuming legal mechanisms that are, in

They have developed over many generations a holistic any case, biased against marginal groups. They may also

traditional scientific knowledge of their lands, natural be useful in addressing challenges from members of local

resources and environment. Their ability to participate elites to community-based conservation (Kumar and

fully in sustainable development practices on their lands Kant, 2005).

has tended to be limited as a result of factors of an Different interests, especially those that are economic, social and historical nature. Their indigenous

usually marginal should be represented in decision- knowledge needs to be supplemented. Local people making and mechanisms should be made to ensure that need to be made aware of depletion dangers and the outcomes of involving indigenous people in natural commercial potential of natural resource management. resource management should be of multifarious use and It will be a positive step towards effective natural affect the indigenous people in a more positive way so resource management.

LFkkuh; yksxksa ds lkFk&lkFk lgHkkfxrk izkd̀frd lalk/u izca/uXkksiky 'kqDyk] fnO; fuukn dksy rFkk lqfer pØorhZ

Lkkjka'kns'kt yksx izkd̀frd lalk/uksa ij vkfJr jgrs gSa vkSj lzksrksa ds ckjs esa tkudkjh j[krs gSaA LFkkuh; leqnk;ksa }kjk izkd̀frd lalk/uksa dk

laj{k.k djus ls mudh vkthfodk lqjf{kr jgrh gS vkSj lkFk gh ikfjra=k dh j{kk gksrh gSA lalk/uksa dh fujarjrk] LFkkuh; yksxksa ds Kku vkfJrrk laLd̀fr ekudksa rFkk mi;kstu ij fuHkZj gksrh gSA orZeku izys[k esa ns'kt yksxksa dh leL;kvksa vkSj pqukSfr;ksa ij fopkj fd;k x;k gSA blesa lq>ko fn;s x;s gSa fd izkd̀frd lalk/uksa ds laj{k.k gsrq LFkkuh; yksxksa vkSj ljdkj ds chp lgHkkfxrk fdl izdkj fodflr dh tk ldrh gS ftlls ns'kt yksxksa dk mRFkku Hkh gks ldsA vf/dka'k ns'kt yksx lhekard {ks=kksa esa vHkkoiw.kZ thou O;rhr djrs gSa blfy, muds fy, lrr~ fodkl dk ekxZ iz'kLr djuk Hkh vko';d gSA bl fn'kk esa gky gh esa dkiQh iz;kl fd;s x;s gSA ;n~;fi bl fn'kk esa dkiQh dqN fd;k x;k gSA fdUrq vHkh cgqr dqN djuk vko';d gSA

ReferencesAdams W.M., Brockington D., Dyson J. and Vira B. (2003). Managing tragedies: understanding conflict over common pool resources.

Science, 302: 1915-1916.Agrawal A. (2001). Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Development, 29: 1649-1672.Agrawal A. and Gibson C. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World

Development, 27: 629-649.Almekinders C. and Louwaars N. (1999). Farmers’ Seed Production. New Approaches and Practices, Intermediate Technology Publications.

London, UK.Anon. (2001). Rural Poverty Report 2001- the Challenge of Ending Rural Poverty. The International Fund for Agricultural development,

Rome. Available at http://www.ifad.org/poverty.Anon. (2002 a). Valuing Diversity in Sustainable Development. International Fund for Agricultural Development, Rome.Anon. (2000 b). About indigenous peoples: frequently asked questions’, http://www.undp.org/csopp/CSO/ NewFiles/ipaboutfaqs.htmlAnon. (2004). Ways to improve community engagement- Working with Indigenous knowledge in natural resource management.

Commonwealth of Australia.



Bardhan P. (1993). Symposium on management of local commons, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7: 87-92.Brundtland G.H. (1999). International consultation on the health of Indigenous Peoples, speech transcript, Geneva: World Health

Organization, http://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/1999Castells C. (1996). The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture, Vol. I: The Rise of the Network Society, Blackwell, Oxford, UK.Chakravarty S., Shukla G. and Suresh C.P. (2008 a).Tribal welfare and development in India: past, present and strategies with special

reference to agriculture and forestry. In: Tribal Development in India. Dimensions and Initiatives, (Ghosh, S., Ed.) The Icfai University Press, Hyderabad. Pp 107-124.

Chakravarty S., Shukla G., Malla S. and Suresh C.P. (2008 b). Farmers Right in Conserving Plant Biodiversity with special reference to North East India. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13: 225-33.

Cobo J.M. (1987). Study of the Problem of Discrimination against Indigenous Populations, United Nations Special Report.Conroy C., Mishra A. and Rai A. (2002). Learning from self-initiated community forest management in Orissa, India. Forest Policy and

Economics, 4: 227-237.Daes E. (1996). Pacific Workshop on the United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UN. Suava, Fiji Islands.Gurung B. (1992). Towards sustainable development: A case in the Eastern Himalayas. Futures, 24: 907-916.Hagmann J. R., Chuma E., Murwira K., Connolly M. and Ficarelli P. (2002). Success factors in integrated natural resource management R&D:

lessons from practice. Conservation Ecology, 5: 29.Harmon D. (2001). On the meaning and moral imperative of diversity. In: On Biocultural Diversity. Linking Language, Knowledge and the

Environment (Maffi, L. ed.), Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D. C. Pp. 53-70.Hildyard N., Hegde P., Wolvekamp P. and Reddy S. (2001). Pluralism, participation and power: joint forest management in India. In:

Participation, the New Tyranny, (Cooke, B. and Kothari, U., eds.) Zed Books, London.Holling C.S., Berkes F. and Folke C. (1998). Science, sustainability and resource management. In: Linking social and ecological systems.

Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience, Berkes, F. and Folke, C., eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Jodha N.S. (1986). Common property resources and the rural poor in dry regions of India. Economic and Political Weekly, 21:169-181.Kaul A. and Efaw C. (2004). A rights-based approach to natural resources management: roles and responsibilities of the various players,

including non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Annals of Forestry, 12:1-21.Kumar S. and Kant S. (2005). Bureaucracy and new management paradigms: modeling forester’s perceptions regarding community-based

forest management in India. Forest Policy and Economics, 7: 651-669.Ligon E. and Narain U. (1999). Government management of village commons: comparing two forest policies. Journal of Environmental

Economics and Management, 37: 272-289.Lise W. (2000). Factors influencing people’s participation in forest management in India. Ecological Economics, 34: 379-392.Maffi L. (2001). Introduction: on the interdependence of biological and cultural diversity. In: On Biocultural Diversity. Linking Language,

Knowledge and the Environment, (Maffi, L., eds.) Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D. C., USA. Pp. 1-50.Manuel G. (1979). World Council of Indigenous Peoples. www.cwis.orgNaik G. (1997). Joint forest management- factors influencing household participation. Economic and Political Weekly, 32: 3084-3089.Nugent J.B. (1993). Between state, markets and households: a neo institutional analysis of local organizations and institutions. World

Development, 21: 623-632.Ostrom E. (1990). Governing the Common: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press, New York.Posey D.A. (1999). Introduction: culture and nature—the inextricable link. In: Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity, (Posey D.A. ed.,)

Intermediate Technology Publications/UNEP, London, UK. Pp. 1-18.Pretty J. (2003). Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science, 302: 1912-1914.Runge C.F. (1986). Common property and collective action in economic development. World Development, 14: 623-636.Sekher M. (2001). Organized participatory resource management: insights from community forestry practices in India. Forest Policy and

Economics, 3: 137-154.Singh A.K. (1993). Tribes and tribal life vol. III, Approaches to development in tribal’s constraints. Sarup and sons, New Delhi.Songorwa A.N. (1999). Community-based wildlife management (CWM) in Tanzania: are the communities interested? World Development,

27: 2061-2079.Sundar N. (2000). Unpacking the ‘joint’ in Joint Forest Management. Development and Change , 311: 255-279.Toledo V.M. (2001). Indigenous knowledge and biodiversity. In: Encyclopedia of Biodiversity, (Levin, S. A. ed.), Academic Press, USA. Pp. 451-463.Trask H.K. (1993). From a Native Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawai’i, Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press.Uphoff N. (1998). Community based natural resource management: connecting micro and macro processes and people with their

environments. Paper presented at International workshop on community based natural resource management held in Washington DC, 10–14 May, 1998.

Varughese G. and Ostrom E. (2001). The contested role of heterogeneity in collective action: some evidence from community forestry in Nepal. World Development, 29: 747-765.

Vira B. (1999). Implementing Joint Forest Management in the field: towards an understanding of the community–bureaucracy interface. In: A New Moral Economy for India’s Forests, (Jeffery, R. and Nandini, S., eds.) Sage, New Delhi.

Yadama G.N. (1997). Tales from the field: observations on the impact of nongovernmental organizations, International Social Work, 40: 145-151.

ESTIMATION OF GENETIC DIVERSITY IN PROGENIES OF SELECTED GENOTYPES OF ULMUS VILLOSA BRANDIS USING RAPD MARKERS

SAPNA THAKUR, I. K. THAKUR, N. B. SINGH, J. P. SHARMA AND M. SANKANUR

Department of Tree Improvement and Genetic Resources, College of ForestryDr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan- 173 230 Himachal Pradesh, INDIA

email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Molecular diversity among 23 promising progenies of Ulmus villosa, which were raised from the seeds collected from various seed sources in Himachal Pradesh (India), was estimated using 10 RAPD primers. A total of 57 markers were generated, all of the 10 primers showed 100 per cent polymorphism. The similarity coefficient among 23 progenies of U. villosa ranged from 0.00 to 0.70. In which, progeny Jugahan-T was found to be the most divergent which separated 3

itself from rest of the progenies at similarity value (0.04) and could be used as a parent in hybridization programme and further improvement programmes. The progenies were grouped into 4 clusters. The cluster II consisted maximum of 12 progenies followed by cluster III (5 progenies), cluster IV (4 progenies) whereas cluster I consisted of single progeny. RAPD analysis proved helpful for estimating the magnitude of genetic diversity at molecular level.

Key words: RAPD, Ulmus villosa, Progenies, Genetic diversity.

Studies on molecular diversity among 23 promising progenies of Ulmus villosa revealed Jugahan –T 3

to be the most divergent and could be used as a parent in hybridization programme.

Introduction considered as one of the most important agro-forestry trees in the Kashmir region. It also has a great potential The elms (Ulmus L.) are represented by outside its natural range for use on degraded land (Singh, approximately 35 species distributed throughout the 1982; Bhardwaj and Mishra, 2005). However, the Dutch temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere and into elm disease (Kalas et al., 2006), caused by certain fungi the subtropics of Central America and Southeast Asia, (Ophiostoma spp), is one of the most serious diseases including six species in eastern North America (Pooler known to trees, has ravaged elm populations all over and Townsend, 2005). There are five species of Ulmus Europe. This poses a challenge for future conservation of found in India, four namely U. wallichiana, U. villosa, U. elm, which in turn necessitates more knowledge about pumila and U. chumlia from N.W Himalaya and U. the distribution of variation in adaptive traits in the lanceifolia from north-eastern regions of the country. species. Apart from this the species being one of the cold Himalayan elms are the source of best fodder and quality hardy and disease resistant species of elm, has been timber. U. wallichiana is lopped for fodder which causes introduced in Europe and North America as an the depletion of regeneration. It is already categorized as ornamental tree and for breeding purposes. Some clones v u l n e r a b l e s p e c i e s i n R e d D a t a B o o k of this species have proved resistant against Dutch elm (www.iucnredlist.org). Ulmus villosa Brandis, commonly disease (DED) that can be used in breeding programmes known as marinoo in India, is a small or medium sized for the development of disease resistant hybrids deciduous tree belonging to family Ulmaceae (Melville (Santamour, 1979). and Heybroek, 1971). It is one of the more distinctive

Asiatic elms and a species capable of remarkable Molecular techniques have been found to be more longevity (Singh, 1991). It grows up to 20-30 m in height useful and accurate for determination of both at elevations from 1200 m to 2500 m with a scattered interspecific and intraspecific genetic variation in plants. distribution in the north western Himalayas. DNA markers can be used early in tree growth and

development to predict dissimilar genetic backgrounds The seed viability is high but seed longevity is low. and to determine which traits a particular individual is It finds greater favour on account of its multiplicity of carrying by examining these small segments. Markers can uses and fast growth habit. It is a multipurpose discern between single or multi-locus modifications as agroforestry tree species producing fodder, fuel and well as dominant or co-dominant alterations in a single timber. Inspite of its immense popularity and multiplicity individual. When applied to the conservation and of its uses less attention has been paid on improvement breeding of fine hardwoods many diverse DNA marker of this species (Melville and Heybroek, 1971). It is

Indian Forester, 140 (12) : 1221-1229, 2014http://www.indianforester.co.in

ISSN No. 0019-4816 (Print)ISSN No. 2321-094X (Online)

Documents

Indigenous People “Vis-à-vis” Participatory Natural Resource Management