Upland Poverty and Climate

Change: How can Forest

Polices be made inclusive?
by

KK Kaushal

The views expressed in this paper/presentation are the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views
or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADB
does not guarantee the source, originality, accuracy, completeness or reliability of any statement, information, data,
finding, interpretation, advice, opinion, or view presented, nor does it make any representation concerning the same.
Climate change and poor
Not only through physical impact but
also through policy responses to real or
perceived threats
Bali road map “economic and social
consequences of response measures.
Forest Policies
Development pathways which aim to
restock the forests, tackle climate change
and upland poverty alleviation
Through appropriate community based
institutions and economic instruments
Case study-evolution of a community
forestry project into poverty alleviation
and climate change mitigation programme
for the upland poor
 JOINT FOREST MANAGEMENT
• 63.72 million hectares of actual forest cover in
India
• Most of it state owned but 40 percent degraded
• Degradation ascribed to rigid state control and
resulting disempowerment and displacement of
indigenous tribal and hill communities which
led to disintegration of community based
resource management.
• 1988 – Joint Forest Management
Social Inclusion In JFM-Case of Tamilnadu
Forestry Project
 Southern state of India
 Geographic area of 13 million ha ( 3.96 %)
 Total population 60 million (6.60%)
 Total forest area 2.26 million ha (17.40% of
land area)
 Actual forest area is only 1.71 million ha
(13.13 % of land area)
Around 1600 forest villages in uplands
where the remnant forest exists (3.11
million)-most disadvantaged, remoteness,
lack of political clout
 Tamilnadu Forestry Project
JFM project for US $200 million since 1997-98
 Degraded forest micro watersheds along with
abutting villages
Forest area into 3 zones- Lower zone- utility
zone, Middle zone-asset creation zone and upper
zone or eco restoration zone. Total area 250 ha
12000 US $ for village development to cover
buffer zone activities
 Village Forest Councils-VFCs

People’s representative body

Planning, execution, protection, harvesting
and benefit sharing
One male and one female member from each
household.
Executive Committee with 5-15 members
including President ( one third women)
Forest Range Officer is member secretary
 Unexpected transition
Programme objective was increasing
the tree cover
Field needs led to broadening
Buffer zone money was doubled to
12000 $ from 6000
Individual grants were converted into
loans.
VFC President made joint signatory
Involvement of line departments
Upland poverty alleviation
Poverty – more than inadequate income
Sustainable poverty alleviation-promoting
opportunity ,facilitating empowerment
and enhancing security
 Economic Opportunity

Tree assets.
Water harvesting structures.
Improvement of basic infrastructure
Promotion of alternate livelihoods
Literacy
Milk cattle and other productive assets
Wage work
 Empowerment

 Three tiers of local government at substate level –village,

block and district level bodies a constitutional status
 Village Panchayat but a group of villages-8-12 thousand
population
 In Tamilnadu a forest village has <500 population ,
insignificant part of Village Panchayat
 VFC- local self government institution
 Women empowerment
 Security

 Restocked forests- diversifying

income,optimizing labour resource,insuring
against agricultural failures
 Restocked forests and check dams also
reduce the drought risk
 Insurance to individual members
 Outcomes

Latest satellite data show significant

improvement in forest cover and density
Palpable improvement in villages
No other government programme has
such comprehensive approach
But it is a massive programme and
depend on all the concerned
Conclusions
No climate change policy programme
such as biodiversity conservation can
succeed unless it caters to people needs
Foresters have to comprehend social,
economic and climate change issues
Mitigation through restocking and VFCs
as community based institutions