Joint Forest Management

Joint Forest Management (JFM) is a partnership that involves both local communities and forest
agencies in the management of natural forests. The National Forest Policy of 1988 was the vehicle
through which the concept was first introduced by the Indian government. The Forest Department
and a village committee known as the Forest Protection Comnmittee (FPC) typically engage in a JFM
agreement, however, provisions of the agreements change from state to state and are called by
different names in different Indian languages. Villagers agree to protect forest resources from
grazing, fire, and unlawful harvesting in return for receiving non-timber forest products and a
portion of the proceeds from the sale of wood products.
What is Joint Forest Management?
JFM is an initiative that involves the local communities that live adjacent to the forest in
the institutionalization of participatory governance over the nation's forest resources.
Rehabilitating degraded forestlands with the help of Forest Protection Committees is one of
the program's main objectives.
This co-management initiative seeks to build partnerships between forest fringe
communities and the Forest Department (FD) based on shared respect and duties and
responsibilities for the preservation and regeneration of the forest.
JFM was established in accordance with the National Forest Policy, which stressed the value
of involving local people.
Subsequently, the government issued the appropriate resolutions and directives to establish
such institutions and strengthen them further.

The majority of Indian states have accepted JFM and issued resolutions approving such
partnerships in accordance with the established rules, despite the fact that each state has a
different institutional setup.
 District Level
District Development Ceondinnting Conmitte
LnxitanmentaLand NatutaLResOurcen Suhrcommittee

JEM Area Level

Forest Managenent Comnmittee:

FOREST
TRUST One Chiefs ReprCsentative.
One Chief Conservator of Forests represcntative (Director FDI
One fronm cach Village Resourve Manapement CHnnittec in arca
One local authority representative rom aren
One liccnce holderrepresentative in area
One Deartment of Agrieulture representative
Dept. ofWater, Lands and l'isheries representtives (3)
Zambin Vildife Authority representative

Village Level
Vllage Resanree Management Comitee:
Representatives of ench user group in the area
Representatives ofthe Village Headen
Representatives of Forest Recourcc Guards (Honorary Forest Officers)

Levels of Joint Forest Management

Joint Forest Management - Examples
Gaddi & Gujjar Tribes: The Gaddi and Gujjar tribes in the
Himalayan states control the
grazing of cattle, which helps to preserve biodiversity by
grass.
preventing the development of wild

Bishnoi Community: The Bishnoi people in

Rajasthan are crucial to ecological preservation
through the famous Chipko Movement.
Maldhari Tribe: The lion population has increased due to
with the nomadic Maldhari tribe, which lives cooperative conservation efforts
close to Gir National Park.
Mundas & Santhals: In the
Chotanagpur region, the Mundas and Santhals worship the
Mahua and Kadamba trees, while in Orissa and
Bihar, the tribes adore the Tamarind and
numerous other trees.

Joint Forest Management - Process

Village communities are given

surrounding forests under JFM. responsibility for the management and preservation of the
By speaking with the local population or with the
regions, forest departments take the assistance certain of NGOs active in
initiative establish such committees.
to
NGOS are also involved in the
serve as the catalysts for creation of these participatory institutions and frequently
capacity building, information
evaluation. distribution, monitoring, and
 Tne establishment of forest protection committees, village forest committees, village forest
Conservation, development groups, etc., is a requirement for the communities.
An executive committee oversees the day-to-day operations of each of these
organizations.
The communities receive the benefit of utilizing small non-timber forest products in
exchange for their services to the forests. Thus, the forest can be preserved in a sustainable
manner.

Joint Forest Management - Importance

Increase in Agricultural and Forest Produce: Forest Committees are established to

collaborate with locals and actively participate in boosting agricultural and forestry
production as wellas processing their output.
Employment Generation: In order to discourage villagers from illegally chopping trees and
encroaching on forests, employment options are provided in communities, such as
sustainable tourism.

offered in
Reduction in Forest Pressure: Other fundamental amenities are attempted to be
order to reduce pressure on the forest.

Preservation of Forest Rights: Together with the Forest Rights Act, the Panchayat (Extension
rights of forest
to Scheduled Areas) Act of 1996 significantly contributes to ensuring the
residents.

(JFMC)
Maintenance of Gender Balance: The Joint Forest Management Committee
maintains gender balance with a dedicated women's subcommittee.

Implementation of MGNREGA: The JFMC implements the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural
animal
Employment Guarantee program in peripheral forest areas and offers training in
husbandry, poultry farming, dairy development, and managing small forestry firms.
Non-Wood Forest Products: JFM also values non-wood forest products (NWFP).

Importance in the Way of Life: NWFP is essential to the way of life in communities that
depend on forests. They satisfy fundamental needs, offer profitable employment during
hard times, and enhance agricultural and wage labor wages.
Enhancement in Rural Health: JFM's collection of medicinal plants plays a significant role in
rural health.

Joint Forest Management - Challenges

Nature of Passed Laws: Laws like the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006, and the Panchayat
Extension to Scheduled Areas (PESA) Act, 1996, have been passed, granting indigenous
peoples and people who live in forests management rights over forest resources.

Need for Funds: Communities seek the considerable funds that the forest departments Owe
them as part of the scheme.
 whether the program should be discontinued.
Dilemma: There are concerns over
afforestation.
Nature: JFM program implementation is expensive. For instance,
Expensive
costs around Rs 20,000 per acre.

Legal Rights: Forest Protection Committees (FPC) lack legal standing as well as
Lack of
financial and executive authority.
has the discretionary
Discretionary Power: In several States, the Forest Department
authority to dissolve FPCs.
design is another
Ineffective Plan & Management: Ineffective management and micro-plan
major challenge faced by Joint Forest Management.
Participation of Women: Despite having formal representation on management
committees, women don't participate.
Local Conflicts: Conflicts between and within communities hinder the operation of the
Forest Protection Committees (FPC).

Ecological Impact of Joint Forest Management

Recruitment was significant in four states, namely Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa,
and West Bengal, accounting for 17% of the regenerating individuals.
Over 10% of the open forest in Karnataka has been brought under JFM, and much wasteland
could still be brought under JFM.

JFM plantations are dominated by exotic firewood species and are deficient in timber and
nontimber species, resulting in lower biodiversity.

The rate of biomass growth in JFM forests was higher than the national average.
Other JFM support activities revealed that various biomass conservation programs were
launched, with a large number of energy-saving and alternative energy devices installed.
Conclusion

JFM micro-planning must guarantee that people are involved in the management of the forest. It
should make it easier to understand the needs of the participating community and the potential for
resource or region development. In cooperation with the participant, it must organize, forecast, and
control the benefits flow. On the basis of site conditions and financial constraints, it should identiy
and emphasize the local resources and esta blish priorities for resource development. JFM creates a
win-win situation for both forest departments and the local populations in terms of better access to
minor forest products from these regenerated forests.
Chapter 24
Joint Forest Management in India
Punyatoya Patra

Abstract Joint Forest Management (JEM) is a partncrship in forest

among state forest departments and local communities in India. The managernent
policies and
guidelines of the JFM were enunciated in the Indian National Forest Policy of 1988
and JFM guidelines of 1990 proposed by the Government of India. These guidelines
were further revised in 2000. The basic rationale of the JFM approach is the coop
eration of local communities and the state government in the protection of forest
resources from fire, illegal grazing, and timber cutting, in exchange for which they
receive non-timber forest products. Indian JFM programs are characterized by a
joint venture approach: they are different from other community managernment
schemes, and are a cross between the top-down and bottom-up approaches. This
chapter discusses two case studies, Morni-Pinjore and Yamunanagar Forest Division
(Haryana) and Janaram Forest Division in Andhra Pradesh, to shed light on the
problems and prospects of JFM in India. It was concluded that there is spatial dis
parity in the success and failure of JFM programs between states and within states
in India.

Keywords Joint Forest Management (JFM) " National Forest Policy " History of
Forest management in India Morni-Pinjore and Yamunanagar Forest Division *
Janaram Forest Division

24.1 Introduction

In the Joint Forest Management (JFM) system, the Forest Department and local
communities jointly protect and manage forest resources and share the costs as well
as the benefits thereof. India is one of the pioneering countries in the world in which
1orest management regimes stress partnerships between the State Forest Department
and local communities. The main driving force behind this is the 1988 Forest
Policy'which envisages people's involvement in the development and protection ot

P. Patra( )
Department of Geography, Aditi Mahavidyalaya, University of Delhi,
New Delhi, Delhi, India
e-mail: punyatoyapatra@gmail.com
Spinger
A.K. Dut etScience+Business Media Dordrecht 2015 449
al. (eds.). Spatial Diversiy and Dynamics in Resounes
and Urban
Development, DOI 10. 1007/978-94-017-9771-9 24
 Forest.
Environment and
450
Ministry of Governnent
both Forest
forests. Acknowledging
policy
this, the
guidelines, on1 June
1990,that
of
involve
forests. popularly
Department
known as Joint
oflndiaissued management reviscd| to
and village
commnunities in the these guidclines were
February 2000, enablingorders for the
strengthen
Forest Management. In issued implementalion
program To date. 27 states have
the
of JFM managing forests in India, from state control
change/shitin inportance have emerged. mainly
As JEM is a major issues of
control, a number of Proper understanding of the
to community d1flerently bydifferent people.
because JEM is vicwed to make thec program successful. Thercfore, this chap-
cOncept ofJFM is nccessary concept, its characteristics, the perceptions of differ.
ter cntically reviews the JFMalong with two case studies.These two case studies
frorm
entgroups of people,etc., also been reviewed to understand the problems and
two differentstates of lndia have
prospectsof JFM in India.

24.2 How JFM Works

At the initial stage, the JFM programme has been implemented in

degraded forest
lands, especially in the vicinity of habitation/villages. The main objective behind it
was to afforest and develop degraded forest areas. However, gradually the program
was extended to good forest areas for better resource planning and management. To
implement the JFM program, the funding is arranged in two ways:first, Government
of India finances in the shape of a grant-in-aid from the National Afforestation and
Eco-Development Board, and second, the village community also obtain funds
from other government agencies, industrial houses, and different foreign agencies
for undertaking these activities. Non-government organizations (NGOS) are also
involved in the JFM program. They motivate local people to participate in a newly
framed community management program. They also arrange workshops to train
both Forest Department and local communities, as the Forest Department officials
are not trained work with acommunity and the local people also have always feared
Forest Department officials. The NGOs have alsoa great role in settling contlicts
arnong different user groups.
Access to forest land and usufruct benefits are given to the beneficiaries, who are
organized into the village institution known as the Forest Protection Committee
(FPC). Each FPC consists of the residents of one village or of a group ot hanlet
who are interested in protecting and regenerating the forest. Each FPC is given d
parucular pach of forest land for which they care, Themembers of the FPC Toma
COrc comnittee, popularly known as the Executive Commilee, for a term ot2 yeals.
The Executive Conniltee prepares amicro plan for
exccution, The
10 to J5 members,
including the village head, ward member, forestcommitee
officials,
ta
and
 agement in India
451

elected members from the

ship rule varies trom state toFPC, nominces of conceerned NGOs, etc. The member-
state, The beneficiaries
usufructs such as grasses, lopped-off branches, branch(members of FPC) are given
produce. free of cost. Further. ifthey successfully protecttops, and other minor forest
the forests, they are grVen
aportion of the share from he sale of trees
when
the share goes to the Forest Department. The they mature; the other portion of
share division
Department and village communities varies from state to state. between Forest

24.3 Origin of the Concept in India

The concept was originated during the late nineteenth century, when Deitrich
Brandis. founder of the Indian Forest Service, had anticipated that a systern of for
estry founded exclusively on state control would lead to great dissatísfaction in the
countryside (Johnson 1995), Brandis had also suggested asystem of forest manage
ment based on a collaborative relationship between the state and local communities
during that time. However, Brandis's suggestion was not accepted by Indian for
estry. which preferred the principle ofa state monopoly over forest land. However.
a gap of
his idea has a strong contemporary resonance in the form of JFM. After
Officer.
almost 100 years, in the early 1970s, Ajit K. Banerjee, a Divisional Forest
andsilviculturists in the Arabari Forest range of West Bengal motivated people from
ten villages in Arabari, involved them in protecting 1,250 ha of totally degraded
that it would be dif
natural sal forest, and were successful. The officer had realized
people who depend
ficult to manage the forest without the cooperation of the local
further ground in the late 1980s
on it for their livelihood. The entire idea gained
the same officer, working in the World Bank, was able to sellthe idea. Later.
when to
(MIC) of Forests, was able
Dr.Amitabh Mukherjee, the then Minister in Charge India passed the JFMM reso
Government of
convince the government; as a result, the
lution in 1990.
same time period of Ajit K. Banerjee's Arabari Forest
Almost during the pioneering
famous for his
Protection. PR. Mishra, a retired soil scientist, became
protecting and developing the catchment of Sukhna Lake in the Sukhomajn
work in for the same is popularly known as
area of Haryana. The model he developed
Pranali (CVP),. The basic idea of CVP is the pooling of private
Chakriya Vikas them together as a Commoa
common land and putting
Individual land or even village the land, its management is predom
(CPR) land. After p0oling
rroperty Resources The management is done by the work
agro-forestry system.
aluy based upon an residents of the village. Last, the net proht IS
the
b, Who are enrolled among andthe workers. The workers andowners in CVPcan be
dvided by the landowners Departments in the JFM Programme,
compared with communities and Forest
 WhichJEMIs
Environmentin
24.4 Preexisting
Implemented
vacoum, it is heingimplemented in a specific
IIMIs not beng mplemented
in a
Therefore, knowledge of forest nanagement
envronment forest management system
Contex. In a preeusing the present day
understand divided into three broad
in Inda IN nevessary to India has been
managementin
Her, the histon of forest
Colonial, and I'ost Colonial. During the Pre Colonial Period
penods Pre Colonal, access resource, that is, open
region were alnost treatedas an 'open
forests of the
The local people uscd tocut trees for their basiC necds such as food
to everybdy. managenent practices. The Colonial Period wit.
fodder. and fucl with traditional
pcriod forests were recognized
nessed rapidexploitation of the forests. During that
monopolized by colonial rulers. Large.
as commercially important resources and undertaken. After
scale supply of commercial timber from the country was
Independence (Post-Colonial), the forests were considered as a National Resource
The Government also realized that there was local need of forests besides the
national need. In reserved forest area, the general public was not allowed to enter
Only mature trees marked by the Forest Department were cut and sold by the
Department itself. In protected forest areas, the nearby villagers were allowed to
enter to take forest products such as bamboos, firewood, and small timbers for mak
ing agricultural implements, fencing fields, constructing houses, etc. In return. they
paid a nominal forest tax. They were allowed to take a limited quantity according o
their needs, not for sale or any other purposes: this was the setup.
However, gradually, because of the increase in population, large-scale industri
alization, and urbanization, the increasing demand for timber could not be met by
the legal timber trade. Therefore, organized looting of forests by an exclusive
group of people such as contractors, smugglers, politicians, and bureaucrats was a
regular feature even in reserved areas. Sometimes forest officials also became
involved in organized looting from fear of the contractors, smugglers, and politi
Cians who were the so-called gangsters of the area. Sometimes they even took
bribes from them. For all these reasons, deforestation took place tosuch an extent
that the local people could not even get dried leaves and wood for fuel. So in some
areas the local people starled protecting the forests by forming informal protecion
committees such as the Youth Club, Mahila Mandal. In the meantime, the
Government also revealed two things: first, it is very dificult to manage a vast tor
ést area with the existing number of forest staff, and
do not feel their belonging in the forest. Then, the second, the local people also
local people who reside in forest fringe areas becameGovernnmentinrealized if these
ment, then only the forest could be protected and no involved forest manage
forest. As aresult, in 1990 the Govermment of outsider couldenter into e
age cooperation betlween the Foresi lndia passed aI resolutionto encour-
and local communities in forest
management, with the partnership basisDepartment
that was popularly known as Joint Forst
Management (JFM).
 453
24.5 Main
Charact eri
)4.5.1 JFM Is aJoint
stics of Joint Forest Managenment
Venture Between theGovernment
and the Community
Accondng to Otiger (2003), JFM is the
munity On one hand and merger of two traditons, the local cof
the l'orest
graphs, aspects of the forest Department on the other. In the following para-
management system of local comIunities, of the Forest
Denartment. and that of JFM have been analyzed, The needs of local
are broadly divided into (wo: cconomic nceds and sociocultural nccds. cornrnunities
neods include their daily livelihood such as food, fodder, fucl, manure, and Fconomic
medi
cines. Thc socioculturalnceds include hunting,cremation, and religious practices in
the forest. Similarly, the need of the Forest Department is predominantly a special
material nced, which includes marketing timber species and a few minor forest
nroducts such as the leaves, bark, and roots of different species (None Timber Forest
Products), which are used for different purposes. The Department has also ecologi
cal needs such as the protection and conservation of the forest. JFM fulfils the eco
nomic needs of both the country and the local people. It provides material to the
Forest Department in the form of raw materials for forest-based industries in the
country. It also provides food, fuel, and fodder to local people. Under this scheme,
Drotection and conservation of the forest are also accomplished.
The local community has indigenous knowledge about the forest. Local com
munities manage a smaller forest area, so they have intimate first-hand knowledge
about the flora, fauna, and local habitat that may go back several generations. On the
other hand, the Forest Department manages a large forest area so it is difficult for
them to have detailed information about the condition of the forest resources. Again.
because of frequent transfers the forest officers cannot gather knowledge of apar
tícular area. so they have a very generalized kind of knowledge. Of course, they
have expert knowledge based on modern science. In the JFM program both indige
nous and highly specialized knowledge work together.
The system that the forest-dwelling communities follow in managing the forest is
a common property system, based on locally accepted norms and values. Access to
the forest is via membership, such as kinship and caste. The system is decentralized
and flexible. The Forest Department follows the State Property System, wherein the
main characteristic is custodial management based on Government laws. Joint Forest
Management is a new institutional framework based on local structure and backed by
official legislation. Here, the framework is decentralized within acentralized system.

24.5.2 JFM Is Different from Other Community Management

Systems
management, par
ere IS mnuch confusion among the concepts: community forest man
management, social forestry, and JFM. In community forest
Government
an orest and the
agement the community takes thelead, manages theresources,
 ipatory/forest minagemeny
partit
in resoUrCes, nd the
an nitiative,
wherens
observer, manapes he
labor
(1)95) cotnmunity
supporter or hired
comonlyas Government yives exclusive
passive
is a Govermment takes the most
Nepal commnunity also operates as an
right,
the n vaonslorms. the
Tores At, lands Ihe
partieates
to the o01
manage forest products The Forest Departrnent facil
assistance if
Aoohn necdel
lovlaers
topoett and
and sellingforest pivestechnical India
esing community and (hefore
Earlier n Departrment inple
autonoous bos n manapement
funconne ofthe foest the l'orest forest
most of
itates the commnity working plan of because of
this ts an
example ot
work with the s laborersinthe
to work managenent
mentatton ot ) M). eople wee hirdto participatory forest The main objectrve of
ocal
an cevample Indiaduring 1980s.villagers away fron the
the ime the ol
ofstafl.this isimplemented in
shortage keeping the lands, and
Socalforestiy Was by lands, open differ
protet forest resources
planting degraded
was to
the program which could be possible by JFM program is totally the
the
forest areas, outside the forest areas. However,Here, both thC government
and
roadsrde lands management programs. share the costs and
bencfits
other forest
ent from the manage the forest resources and
ommunities

Approach
JFM Is Betweena Top-Down
24.5.3 and Down-Top Approach
approach.
different ways: the top-down
managed in three approach. In the top-down
Natural resources can be co-management
down-top approach, and the and in the down-top approach the
the power exclusively co-management.
approach. the state holds all in natural resources management. In
community has full autonomy users becomes effective. JFM is
and
sharing of responsibilities between the state responsibilities, costs, and benefts
the co-management approach in which communities.
nothing but a ForestDepartment and local
are shared between the

Program
24.5.4 The Dual Nature of theJFM
major shift that has transferred government
as a
On the one hand, JFM is seen centralized management to decentralized
controlled policies and attitudes from
orientation to resource orientation, from a production
management, from revenue
sustainability notive, from target orientation to process orientation, and
motive to a people (1992), On the otherhand, it is seet
Irom restricting people lo working with outlay and
increased financial
as an effort by the Forest Department to garner areas, which are
more ForestAreas)
expand its territories and spheres of jurisdiction to more and(protected
normally under the jurisdiction of the Revenue Departmentl paper mills,for news-
and other government development agencies. A number of
print, Iose leaseholds in the forest arcas.
 Joint Forest
24
Management inIndia
455
24.6 JFM as Perceived
by
As practiecedin India for
Different Groups of People
more than I5
years, JFM meanss different things to different
groups of people. In the
following
who are involved
directly in the J1M patagraphs,
the views of four groups of people
Fonrest Department
oficials, Programnme afe discuSsed. These proups are
Again. vary ing views within NGOs, unding agencies, and loIcal conrnunities.
According to the Forest cach groupDcan be observed
of degraded forests and Department,of JFM
conservation yood
is a mode of generat1ng/rchabilitation
in the lFS, Gujarat, reafirms his faith in JFM forests, R.S. Pathan (199%), forrnerly
as a tool to cnrich vast degraded lands
in the country. Here, the forest officials are more
concerncd for the
forest resources than for community interest. According to S. Palit conservalions of
(2002), who Was
carlier IFS, \West Bengal, JFM is widely viewed as a
cost-effective ncans of Sug
Ag
ing retorestation. Rao et al. (2006)think as does Palit. They consider JFM as asecur cost
effective approach for the regeneration and conservation of forests. Actually, without
the JFM Programme, protection of the vast forest lands in India from srmugglers.
industrialists, and contractors needs strict policing by a large number of Forest
Department staff, which would require avery large amount of money for their sal
ary and is not feasible economically. Through the JFM Programme it is possible to
renew and conserve the forest by involving people in forest protection. Also, the
view of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Madhya Pradesh (M.P.), toward
JFM is interesting. According to him, without the concerted effort of specialists in
participatory approach, gender sensitivity, and community organizing, JFM in M.P.
is nothing more than career advancement for Forest Department officials (Andrea
2006). It means that in M.P. most of the forest officials are involved in JFM for their Cla
OWn career, not for community development.
According to some NGOs, JFM means empowerment of people in the manage
Iment of their own natural resources. For other NGOs, the JFM program not only
improves the forests but also has immense potential for uniting people and for work
ing together. Many international-level NGOS state that it is the right ot the commu
nity to participate in the local resource management system, which could be possible
through JFM in India. According to the pioneers of Hill Resources Mlanagement
Societies, the main aim of JFM is to initiate mobilization for collective action.
empowerment, and institution building.
ways. For industri
Ihe different funding agencies also perceive JFM in different forest area and
alists who are engaged in mining/industrial activities within the can be triendly
Tünding for the program, JFM is the comnon ground where they
an industry in
With local people to avoid any future conflict regarding setting up people, JEM Is
other donor agencies, such as corporale sector
dieir native land. For exemption trom income tax.
ppotunity where they can invest money to get an community. For the com
Ine perception of JFM also varies from community oinconie fromthe tirst day of
munity that manages goodforest land and has aregular
food, fuel wood, and
management, JFM is a mode of solutiontotheir problens ofproducts and/or a way
fodder or a means to ensure their daily requirenent of forest
456
P.Patra
totally degraded forest land
community that manages protecting and
te tnerease
income The
gevernment for planting trees and them in the
are pad wages hy the employment-oricnted program.
Progtamme as an The
heginning views the FM orquality land,
where there Is no regular
short-term
cOmmunit that manages fodder. and who wait for a long--term return (such as
and
thcomes h as fod. fuel. in which the government take services from them
approach
thmer), Vien JFM as an consideration (they may of may not give these
returns n future
as a fav. keepng
returns to them in future)
perveptions regard1ng JFM of different grOups of people may
Thesc dfterent situation. First. it may lead toward a conflicting
contradietory
ypes of
NGOS, donor agencies, and connmunities mas
situation among them. Foresters, other. Second, they may be encouraord
adjusting to cach
have obiousditticulties in the JFM Programme. For exarmple.
the
diferent. complementary roles in
to have formulating policies, implementing various
roie of the Forest Department includes
demarcating village forest boundaries, and imparting training. The com
schemes, trees., collecting minor prod
includes protecting forest areas, planting
munity role workshops to train both Foresr
ucts, logging. etc. NGOS motivate people, arrange
among different user
Department staff and local communities. settle conflicts situation is the better
cause. The second
groups: a funding agency invests funds for a that JFM is Droba
situation. The communities. NGOS, and foresters should realize
bly the last opportunity for them to exhibit learning and cohesive
working regarding
their forests. Otherwise, the economic pressures on the Government may compel
be few.
opting for privatization of such lands, where the gainers would

24.7 Problems and Prospects of JFM

From the foregoing paragraphs one can apprehend that although the JFM program
has great prospects in India, it would have a number of problems at the field level
where a number of groups and organizations with different bents are involved. S.
the problems and prospects behind the JFM Programme have been explained
through two differentcase studies from different parts of India, one from the north
ern part of India and the other from the southern part of India: the first case study
was taken from Morni-Pinjore and Yamunanagar Forest Division of Haryana, and
thesecond case study from the Janaram Forest Division ofAndhra Pradesh.

24.7.! Case Study 1: Morni-Pinjore and Yamunanagar Forest

Division, Haryana
A ract of land covering 3,000 km in the Morni-Pinjore and Yamunanagar Fortst
DivIsIon, located toward north and northeast Haryana, has been taken as a Case
study. Physiographically, thiS region comes under the Siwalik
Himalavas and has