Details of Module and its Structure

Module Detail

Subject Name Sociology

Paper Name Ecology and Society

Module Name/Title Forest Ecology

Pre-requisites

Objectives

Keywords Forest Laws, Colonial plunder, NTFP, Forest Management,

Commodification, Forest based livelihoods

Structure of Module / Syllabus of a module (Define Topic / Sub-topic of module)

Summary In this Module we will explore the world of forest ecology and a very
important component of it, Non Timber Forest Produce. We will try to
understand the interlink ages between Forest Ecology, Governance and
Livelihood. With the help of some Case studies will see
1. Changing roles of NTFPs.
2. How NTFPs are used in different ways by the community.

Role Name Affiliation

Principal Investigator Prof Sujata Patel University of Hyderabad

Paper Coordinator Himanshu Upadhyaya Azim Premji University

Content Writer/Author Ritu Vaishnav Research Scholar, Azim Premji

(CW) University
Content Reviewer (CR) Himanshu Upadhyaya Azim Premji University
Language Editor (LE) Himanshu Upadhyaya Azim Premji University
Forest Ecology and NTFP

Introduction:

Human life depends on forest for many purposes like shelter, subsistence, livelihood, Wood,
Medicine, Agriculture, Aesthetics and many more. Forest are the primary source and protector
of natural resources. Indian forests are house to wide variety of vegetation constituting almost
600 species of hardwood trees that include ‘Sal’ & ‘Teak’. Because of such a huge variety,
India is considered amongst the mega biodiverse region in the world. Indian forests types
include tropical evergreens, tropical deciduous, swamps, mangroves, sub-tropical, montane,
scrub, sub-alpine and alpine forests.

In this Module we will explore the world of forest ecology and a very important component of
it, Non Timber Forest Produce. We will try to understand the interlinkages between Forest
Ecology, Governance and Livelihood. With the help of some Case studies will see

1. Changing roles of NTFPs.

2. How NTFPs are used in different ways by the community.

Historical understanding of Forestry:

Historically, forests in India were largely unexplored for the purpose of trade or economic
exchanges before the colonial period, but they did have cultural, spiritual and social value. We
often come across narrations in the mythical texts and archives that revolve around forest which
indicates the old relationship of humans and forest. Even today there are spaces called ‘Sacred
Grooves’ which are part of forest but treated as sacred place by people living there. They have
history of their lineages attached to these places.

The value that people attach to the forest largely depends on their proximity to the forest, their
economic dependency and their historical, physical and cultural relationship with the forest.
For people who live close to the forests and who depend on them for their livelihood, direct
material needs and cultural and spiritual values tend to prevail. People further away (for
instance the urban population) attach more value to aesthetical and recreational values, while
concerns at global level tend to relate to ecological and economic values.1

A large number of our population lives in forests situated across the country. With a large
population still living in the villages and forest areas, it becomes utterly important for us to

1
Singhal, R. "Changing models of forest governance in India: Evolution or revolution?” 56-72. Indian Institute
of Forest Management. Bhopal
understand the lifestyle of our people living in those areas and intrinsically related to forest
resources. There have been several transitions in the way the forest were associated with the
communities and the role of state in that dynamics. Forest assumes different roles in different
spheres of life like the Social, Economic, Political and Cultural. All these relations and roles
evolve with time and continuously get affected by the role of different actors.

Forestry under British India:

British India saw dramatic changes in the forest use, depletion and state’s role in forest
management. During the Colonial regime in the country the need of timber and need of land
for crop cultivation resulted into deforestation and conversion of forest land into agricultural
land on large scale. In Late 1790s India was one of the leading supplier of Timber to the British.
Massive use of forest resource, specifically timber for facilitating the expansion of industries,
led to the shortage of supply as the natural reproduction system could not match the pace of
demand. The growing need of Industrial development gave way to higher demands of natural
resources of which timber was prime. Timber needs were fulfilled from all across the country.
For example Teak was used for ship building industries and Sal was used for railways.

The process of huge extraction and shortage of resources culminated into the advent of
scientific forestry and establishment of Indian Forest Service in 1864. Dietrich Brandis, a
German forester was appointed as its first inspector general. Colonial government confined the
user rights to its own domain. Local communities were denied access in order to protect forests
from over utilisation. This was done through Indian Forest act 1865 amended to Indian Forest
Act 1878 and later through The Indian Forest Act 1927. There were interventions to transform
the forest composition as well, the slow growth of the natural vegetation could not meet the
requirements of the growing trade. The best known example is the transformation of mixed
oak-conifer forest into single species of Chir Pine. This type of intervention effected the
livestock of the region, resulting into the non-availability of food as the whole food chain got
disturbed. High priorities were given to the need of colonial government over the needs of
community and local people. These disturbances were in the roots of many dissatisfactions in
the communities across the country and often resulted into rebellions against the government.
One of the most celebrated rebellion is the Chipko movement.

Post-Independence:

Post-Independence the government was still following the colonial legislation- The Indian
Forest Act 1927. Only after the enactment of the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 the emphasis
shifted to conservation from an extraction oriented approach. This empowered the state in
relation to the centre as they gave state governments a space to operate without the permission
of central government. Forest Policy came into being in the year of 1952 which was a successor
of Forest Policy 1894. After the formulation of Forest Policy in 1988 the emphasis of policy
was directed towards the conservation of environment instead the user based embeddedness of
its successors. It included the local level governance mechanisms like panchayat, local
communities, individual, participate in different levels of participation in the decision making
process. Many initiatives through various legislations and scheme are introduced like the Joint
Forest Management, Van Panchayat, Forest Protection committees, National Westland
Development Board etc. for the conservation purpose as well as to recognise the community
members as stakeholders. Governance issues relating to forest (of any nature: legislative,
judicial or executive) make a huge impact on a substantial part of the population as they not
only live in the forest but also depend on the forest resources for subsistence and livelihood
purposes along with a cultural and social traditional linkage. To understand forest governance
then becomes a prerequisite to understand forestry and the lives of communities related to it.
Most of the communities dependent on the forest produces are Tribal Groups. They generally
depend on the minor forest produces or what is often referred as the Non Timber Forest
Produce.

Forest Governance in India:

“Forestry provides a useful entry point for governance programmes due to its focus, linking
the global to national and local; high levels of income and other benefits which it generates,
and its importance in rural livelihoods and poverty alleviation. Moreover, public participation,
accountability, transparent government, and pro-poor policy change themes have been central
to the forest, which are also crucial dimensions of governance”.2

Forest come under the concurrent list in the 7th schedule of the Constitution of India, which
implies that both the centre and state can make policies unless the state’s policy come in conflict
with that of union. Forest governance predominantly is done through three modes

1. Governance by State
2. Governance by Civil Society
3. Governance, jointly by both State and Civil Society.3

2
Monditoka, Aruna Kumar. "Decentralized Forest Governance-A Policy Perspective." Centre For Economic and
Social Studies, Begumpet, Hyderabad, India (2011)
3
Singhal. Changing models of forest governance in India. 62-65
Governance by State is done on central level where national policies on forests are made.
Operated through ministry of Environment and Forest, State Forest Department and the
legislations passed by Union government. Governance by civil society implies community
making cooperatives and managing the resources. The most desirable type of governance today
is the governance where both the state and the civil society jointly take care of the resources.
Most of the legislations now focus on this type of management of resources where locals are
treated as stakeholders through legal means acknowledging their social political and economic
rights over forest creating a sense of ownership.

There are several legislations in the country that have been passed and are operational. They
have different features that focus on different aspects of the forest ecology. Below is the table
explaining them and can help us analyse and compare the same.

Source: Changing Models of Forest Governance in India: Evolution or Revolution? Rekha

S. N. Forest Related Policy& Act Salient Features

1 Constitution of India under The state shall endeavour Protection and

section 10 ( 42nd Amendment) improvement of environment and safeguarding
Act 1976 Article 48A
2 Constitution of India
section 11 ( 42nd Amendment) including forests, lakes, rivers, and wild life is
Act 1976 Article 51A
3 Forest Act , 1865
4 Forest Policy, 1894
5 National Forest Policy, 1952
Singhal
of forests and wildlife
under Protect and improve natural environment
one of the fundamental duties of every citizen.
The first Forest Act was enacted in 1865 mainly
to facilitate the acquisition of forest areas that
could supply timber to the railways without
abridging the existing rights of the people.
First policy statement aimed at managing the
state forest for public benefits. Provided rights
and restrictions to the neighbouring population.
Allowed local communities to manage inferior
forest for fulfilling fodder and grazing needs
A resolution on the first post-independence
Forest Policy was issued in 1952. It emphasized
a balance across economic, ecological and social
benefits from the forests. It thus proposed to
classify the forests on a functional basis into (i)
 protection forests, (ii) national forests, (iii)
Village forests, and (iv) tree lands. The provision
of centralised management was continued in this
policy.
6 National Commission on Ushered major shift in the sector. Emphasized
Agriculture ( NCA) 1976 need to address the production of industrial wood
for forest based industry, defence and
communication. Need of business management
skill in forest managers. To meet the present and
future demands for protective and re-creative
functions.
7 National Forest policy, 1988 It was only about 25 years later that the Forest
Policy 1988 underscored community
Participation in protection and development of
forests. The policy is in effect on date. It is
comprehensive document with directives on
afforestation, farm forestry, management of
forests, rights and concessions, diversion of
forest land wild life conservation, tribal
communities, forest fire and grazing, forest based
industries, forest extension, education, research,
personnel management, data base, legal and
financial support.
8 National Wild life Action Plan , National Board for wildlife constituted in
2002 September 2003 with full strength of law and
land behind. Responsibility to provide thrust to
conservation activities.
9 Joint Forest management, 1990 The primary objective of the National Forest
( as per provisions of 1988 Policy, 1988 is to ensure environmental stability
Policy) and ecological balance. The Policy also
emphasizes on the need to meet the domestic
demands of rural people for forest produce, and
involve them in protection and management of
the forests. The National Forestry Action
 Programme, 1999 also addresses the Government
s concern towards Sustainable Forest
Management. Forest management became the
joint responsibility of communities and forestry
personnel undergone a paradigm shift. By 2005
all 28 states as adopted 84 thousand committees
looking after 17 million ha of forest land in
September 2003. This figure has increased
tremendously due to central funding through
National Afforestation Programme (NAP) and
externally funded projects. , the forest sector is
being seen as a crucial component in eradicating
rural poverty and providing livelihoods to the
communities dwelling in and around the forests.
Presence of legislations have made an everlasting effect on the lives of people. But there exist
many challenges to them as it heavily depend upon the interaction of societies with the legal
provisions. There are various overlaps and disconnects in the legislations. This can be attributed
to different bodies and authorities proposing and making different laws.

Challenges to Forest Governance:

Predominant factor that affect forest governance is the population that has produced immense
pressure on Natural resources in general and NTFP in particular.The situation in India is even
more serious as with only 2% of the world’s forests, the country has to serve about 15% of the
world population. While about 45% of the energy in the Third World is met from wood, over
85% of the rural energy in India is met from biomass and about 50% of it is collected from
forests.4

Most of the NTFPs are nationalized leaving a very less space for the market to operate in
expanding manner. Middlemen enjoy the most of profits from NTFPs because of two reasons:
1. State is unable to reach the people directly and thus depends heavily on Middlemen
facilitating market. 2. Labors engaged in the collection and processing are unaware of the
market value of the product and have a very poor bargaining power. These factors lead to

4
Hegde, NG. “Development of Non-Timber Forest Product Species for providing Sustainable livelihood in India”.
Paper presented in the International Workshop on Global Partnership on Non-Timber Forest products for
Livelihood Development. International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR), Morocco. December 1-3, 2005
unsustainable dynamics of labor, state and market and disconnect in the process of
development.

With the changing economic structure and higher integration of population into formal
economic structure NTFPs are explored for economic exchange. This has converted the NTFPs
into commodities and to some extent incentivize people to protect and enhance them for their
livelihood. Kishore and Belle (2004) argued that income had statistically significant negative
impact on deforestation where rising income is likely to reduce deforestation and concluded
that “improving governance may have an indirect but strong impact on curbing deforestation”.5
They also argued that forest governance depends heavily on the individuals involved rather
than the nature of management in the form of concentration of authority (centralisation/
decentralisation).

There is a clear lack of a comprehensive policy approach, this is basically because there is a
fairly large variation in the NTFPs produced and differentiated state regimes. Bamboo can be
taken as an example for the same as it is treated as a ‘minor forest produce’ under Forest Rights
Act 2006 and is treated as a timber product under Indian Forest Act 1927. Provisions and
privileges under PESA and Wildlife Protection Act are contradictory to each other regarding
Minor Forest Produce. These contradictions often lead people into problems and conflict.
Coherence and coordination is required to make use of NTFPs at the maximum possible extent
in a sustainable and equitable manner.

Non Timber Forest Produce (NTFP):

Traditionally Non Timber Forest Products refers to all biological material other than timber
extracted from natural forests for human and animal use and have both consumptive and
exchange value. Globally NTFP/NWFP are defined as forest produce consisting of goods of
biological origin other than woods, derived from forest, other wood land and trees outside
forest.6 There is a broad category of NTFP based on their usage and importance.

1. NTFP for Food Security: Includes the produces that are used by people for their
Diets and living. For example Honey.
2. NTFP for Wood and Biomass: This refers to the usage of wood for fuel, furniture
and other such works and the procurement of forage and manure.

5
Kishor, Nalin, and Arati Belle. "Does improved governance contribute to sustainable forest
management?." Journal of Sustainable Forestry 19, no. 1-3 (2004): 55-79.
6
Report of the sub-group II on NTFP and their Sustainable Management in the 12th Five Year Plan, 2011
 3. NTFP for Medicines and Plant Protection: there are traditional usage of NTFPs for
medicinal and healing purposes. Many new NTFPs are being explored for the same
purpose. This is invariably utilised for human and animals. They are also used as
pesticides and crop supplements. for many plants
4. NTFP for Aromatics, Dyes and Oilseeds: they are mostly utilized for industrial
purposes.

NTFPs have constituted an important component of rural livelihood in India, particularly in the
tribal dominated forest regions, In addition they have formed an important source of forest
revenue in the country and, therefore, remained under the control of the forest department.
Public and private interests have over the last few decades been extremely interested in NTFPs
as the case of Chattisgarh State demonstrates.7 Non-Timber Forest Produce Case studies from
India: The livelihood school

The importance of NTFP is widely acknowledged by the policy makers, economists,

sociologists and others in different domains, for the role it plays as a ‘safety net’ especially in
the lean seasons. Yet, most of the policies relating to forest often undermines NTFPs which
estimates around 68% of the total export of forestry sector. NTFPs account for the major
income received by the forest departments in the current times as there are many restrictions
put on the extraction of trees. The state often finds itself in the dilemma of conservation and
need of people. Commercial utilization leads to over extraction by the communities if not kept
in check whereas if total restriction is imposed, it tend to disturbs the lives and the
ecosystem.Furthermore, Severe shortage in NTFPs do not get addressed as the communities
continue using them without opting for alternatives. They fail to opt for alternative mainly
because of the poverty and unavailability of affordable option.

Some Case Studies:

With very wide spectrum of variety of spectrum of NTFPs available and diverse utilization it
is impossible to understand them only through theoretical frameworks, acts and legislations.
Therefor we will make an attempt to understand them through some case studies of various
kinds.

7
Gautam, Singh Rajendra and Sharma, Deepak. “Livelihood Promotion through Non Timber Forest Produce: A
Case of Chattisgarh State”. Non-Timber Forest Produce Case studies from India: The livelihood school.
http://ilrtindia.org/downloads/rajendra%20S%20case%202-2_11.pdf
In Chhattisgarh where 11185 village out of a total of 19720 villages are forest fringed, the importance of
NTFPs in the livelihood security of the rural population has led the state government to declare seven NTFPs
such as Tendu leaves, Saal seed, harra, gum (khair, dhawara, kullu and babool) as nationalised and establish
the CGMFP Federation with an objective promote trade and development of these minor forest produces
in the interest of MFP collectors, mostly tribal. The remaining other MFPs were left free for trade because
their distribution and production varied with respect to time and space. As a result, villagers would get
assured minimum prices for nationalized NTFPs, but low collection prices and often exploitation by
middlemen for the non-nationalized NTFPs due to inadequate market facility development in the remote
rural areas. Therefore, the state government issued a new state forest policy in 2002 declaring the State as
Herbal State, with the objectives of conservation of NTFP based industries for processing of MFP so as to
generate additional employment opportunities in the state and provide health cover. Accordingly, CGMFP
Federation developed a comprehensive programme focusing on organized production, collection,
processing and marketing through community based institutional and marketing set-up in the form of
“Sanjeevani’. A separate multi-disciplinary task force headed by Conservator of Forests (CF) has been
established within the federation to translate this programme into reality. The present study is an attempt
to understand the intervention in detail and its impact on the livelihoods of the rural poor.
The Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce Cooperative Federation Limited came into being in October
2000 as apex organisation with a three-tier cooperative structure after the division of erstwhile Madhya
Pradesh state. The federation comprise of an apex body at the state level, 32 district Unions at the district
level and 913 primary forest produce cooperative societies at the village level. At present there are about
10000 collection centres spread over the length and breadth of the state and approximately has covered
around 9.78 lakhs forest produce gatherers the federation collects and markets nationalised NTFPs like Sal
seeds, Tendu leaves, Harra and gum through this three-tier cooperative structure. After the new state
forest policy a task force under CF was constituted with the federation to achieve the objective of Herbal
State. Major tasks being done by the federation are:
a) Collection and trade of nationalised forest produce.
b) Collection and trade of non-nationalized minor forest produce including medical and aromatic plants
with assured market tie up.
c) Promotion of MFP-based processing units
d) Conservation development and sustainable utilisation of MFPs
e) Promotion of cultivation of MFP species including medicinal, aromatic and dye plants.

(Livelihood Promotion through Non Timber Forest Produce: A Case of Chattisgarh State,
Gautam and Sharma)
The case of Sanjeevani mart
The Sanjeevani mart in Raipur is run by a ten member SHG formed in the year of 2005. For
years it had been involved in saving and helping each other through petty cash. It was like an
Household saving group (HSG). But since the group did not have its own source of income, it
was difficult for them to with this and gradually it began to disintegrate. CGMFP federation
developed Sanjeev Mart using funds form the European commission supported project and
invited expression of Interest from SHGs to operate Sanjeevani. The year 2007 brought a new
dimension to this SHG when it got associated with the CGMFP federation for operating the
Sanjeevani mart. The SHG did not make any investment. All the herbs and herbal product
were supplied by Raipur Mart. SHG members received training in group dynamics record
keeping Ayurvedic medicines and information
For operating the Sanjeevani responsibilities are shared among the 10 members working in
three shifts for ten hours every day. They have mutual understanding about the time and at
a time one find two members managing the shop. As MART is also attached they also get
support from Executives Presently Sanjeevani has 38 Drug products which are supplied by
Raipur mart on demand by the group. Tie ups have been done with two local vaidyas who sits
in sanjeevani twice a week ach and prescribe herbal medicines to customers. Side by side
customers are also given use of different medicine through the technical pamphlet. By the
group members. Along with the main Sanjeevani store the group members set up stalls for
sale of herbal products in exhibitions and fares. The shg gets a commission of 15 % on the
total sale in the month. The monthly sale of herbs and herbal products in Raipur Sanjeevani
ranges between INR 125000 and 150000 which takes the commission up to a tune of 18750
to 22500. This amount is distributed equally among the members. They take pride in
contributing to 25-30 percent to their family income. The president of the SHG with the
income from Sanjeevani she has started sending her children to convent school. The SHG
members see this as life changing opportunity. Now they also train members from other SHGs
to plan to start Sanjeevani in their city/town. During discussion the SHG members pointed
out that the sale of herbal product is increasing every day. They also use their personal
network for advertising and sale of the herbal products. However, the members also pointed
out that many medicines which are much in demand by consumers are not available at their
Sanjeevani stores and this affect their relation with consumers. They demand a regular supply
from the marts.

(Livelihood Promotion through Non Timber Forest Produce: A Case of Chattisgarh State,
Gautam and Sharma)
Non Timber Forest Produce Case studies from India: The livelihood school.
Village level SHGs
Jeerapur is one of the forest fringe villages in kumani Panchayat of Bastar. It has 77 households
of which 35 families are now involved in collection of NTFPs like Churaki Ful (Punder Fu), Arjun
Chaal: Patal Umhara amd salparni. They are also working on vlue adition in form of grading and
drying. All this started when Purush Swa Shahayata Samuh was identified for purchase of NTFP
raw material. They can sell their collection at Kuranj, a temporary storage centre near their
village but normally they sell their product directly to Jagdalpur mart. Considering their
activeness and involvement the forest department has constructed a concrete platform of
dimension 27*27 meters for drying cleaning and grading of raw NTFPs. In this village almost
every family owns two to five tamarind trees which fetches them INR 2000-4000/ per tree,
without value addition. The last two years have opened up new occupations for substantial
family income. Those who were engaged in other activities are now getting involved in NTFP
collection, thanks to the presence of an SGH that will buy their produce.

(Livelihood Promotion through Non Timber Forest Produce: A Case of Chattisgarh State,
Gautam and Sharma)