Abstract:
Biodiversity includes all components of biological diversity of relevance to food and agriculture, including genetic crop and livestock resources. Agricultural and forest biodiversity provides food, income and materials for clothing, shelter and medicine. It also executes ecological services essential to human survival, such as nutrient cycling, pest and disease regulation and pollination.
Much has been written about the impacts on biodiversity from land use practices, but only limited work has been done on how foresters and farmers, the "custodians of biodiversity," manage their resources to sustain and enhance them. Through innovation and experiment, foresters and farmers have accumulated rich knowledge of managed biodiversity. Collaborative efforts among scientists, foresters and small farmers have been initiated to tap traditional’ knowledge and skills for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in agro-ecosystems.
Management of forest biodiversity has temporal and spatial attributes as well as socio-economic implications. This paper intended to share the experiences and ideas of the community working on biodiversity with the hope that the collected knowledge would be useful for international and national biodiversity programmes and policy.
Key words: Biodiversity Conservation, Medicinal Plants, Strategies
Introduction
India is one of the world's 12 mega diversity centers with 47000 plant species and is divided into twenty agro-eco zones (Prakash and Singh 2001). The increased pressure on forest and other vegetation areas for fodder, fuel wood and livelihood requirements has resulted in degradation of both agriculture and forest areas with associated loss of biodiversity of this highly fragile ecosystem. It is well recognized that 4/5th of the population earn their livelihood on subsistence agriculture and animal husbandry. Husain et al., 2002 studied the socio-economic condition of some areas of Uttaranchal and found that people of the area heavily depend on the forest resources. Further Husain and Raina, 2004 have noticed significant awareness among the farmers towards the conservation of the resources.
National Forest Policy of 1988 emphasizes the involvement of people in protection, regeneration and development of forest ecosystem by preventing further degradation of forest, rehabilitation of degraded forest areas and finding alternate source of timber, fuel wood and fodder. Increasing population has raised the demand for agriculture produce on one hand and reduced the size of land holding on the other. This has resulted in conversion of marginal lands into agricultural lands and encroachment of forestlands. If integrated efforts are not undertaken timely to arrest the degradation processes, this may further complicate the already serious ecological consequences.
The current study focused on developing and adopting an integrated and participatory village agro–ecosystem approach to meet the diverse biomass needs of the communities and simultaneously to promote restoration of biodiversity on degraded lands.
This will require sustainable and integrated management of agricultural lands along with degraded forest and community lands keeping in view the resource requirements of the population. These efforts may result in reduction in land degradation; increase biomass resulting in higher sequestration of carbon and in–situ conservation of genetic diversity of endemic trees and medicinal plants. The added focus on improved livestock management and productivity is expected to increase the income generation activity of the farmers and at the same time reduce pressure on the forest resources.
Methodology
Successive fieldwork has been conducted since 2001 on soil, ecological studies investigations till 2003 and a more detailed study on plants of medicinal importance. Primary ethnobotanical data was obtained from knowledgeable persons or key informants of a community. Each and every community or village has loyal specialists, medicine men or herbal practitioners freely accessible to their respective communities. On the basis of gathered information conservation strategy proposed.
Results and Discussion
Assessment of the rare, endangered and endemic species requires a lot of extensive and intensive field study, exposure and experience in workshops, thorough scientific knowledge and vast literature search. Our knowledge is limited to plant diversity and the process of evaluation. The Botanical Survey of India has done commendable work on rare and endemic species of the country and the regional assessment of medicinal plants has been conducted
Evaluation of rare, endangered and endemic species requires a lot of energy, vast field experience and scientific know how. The present assessment is not at all exhaustive, and the categorization being for the first time in India, will certainly require re-evaluation at the appropriate time. The IUCN criteria also provide that if the original categorization is found erroneous, or if any changes occur, the taxon can be transferred to the appropriate category or removed from the threatened category altogether without delay. The essential message is that identified, threatened and endemic species of ethnomedicinal plants should be given top priority for in-situ and ex-situ conservation. This involves the conservation of genetic resources of plants away from their area of origin or development. Traditionally, International Plant Genetic Research Institute (IPGRI) has collected diversity of crops with orthodox seed and encouraged their conservation in cold storage. Collections were also made of some crops with recalcitrant seed that were stored as live plants in field gene banks. Ex situ conservation occurs mainly in gene banks that can be categorized into four principal types:
1.Seed gene banks,
2.Field gene banks,
3.in vitro gene banks and
4.Cryo-preserved gene banks
The different gene banks that exist face a range of problems related to evaluation, characterisation, monitoring, regeneration, data management, storage and dissemination of available technical information. For each category of gene banks, specific actions must be undertaken in order to tackle the problems that are threatening the conservation of genetic resources in these banks. The matrix in the recapitulates the various methodological approaches that have been identified to bring some solutions to the problems that gene banks face. There is also a need to evaluate the effectiveness of these existing gene banks for their effectiveness and efficiency. To invest in the development of core collections and finding a combination of techniques for cost effective germplasm conservation in the region and solve the problems of maintaining the viability of germplasm ex situ.
The main objective of gene banks is to encourage, support and undertake activities to improve the management of genetic resources so as to eradicate poverty, increase food security and protect the environment. In situ (agro-ecosystem) conservation is a relatively new approach to the science of plant gene resource conservation. It involves the management of diversity in agro- and natural ecosystems, and focuses on the processes that create and maintain diversity in ecosystems. It thus promotes biodiversity enrichment and conservation in situ, conservation as:
“The maintenance and recovery of viable populations of species in their natural surroundings and, in the case of domesticated or cultivated species, in the surroundings where they have developed their distinctive properties.”
In situ conservation allows for the continued evolution of varieties while conserving adaptive traits in a broad sense. The system can also increase the control of local communities over their genetic resources. To expand its activities and intensify operations and capacity development with national partners in this area. A schematic representation showing the linkage of in situ conservation to ex situ is shown in figure below.
Conservation and Use of Plant Genetic Resources
Some of the key elements and activities under the in situ agro-ecosystem component include understanding diversity in in situ conservation systems, enhancing the benefits of crop genetic resources to ensure in situ conservation on farm, socioeconomic studies and environmental and resource management studies. To encourage conservation of natural ecosystems has a long history, but is a relatively new area. The focus in recent years has been on forest ecosystems. Plant gene resource expends its scope into crop wild relatives and medicinal plants; there will be a need for developing strategies on how to conserve species in the wild habitats. The main interest here is that of protecting the habitat of target species of crop wild relatives and medicinal plants so that the natural evolutionary processes can be maintained so as to generate new variation in the genepool to cope with the rapidly changing environmental conditions. Key activities in this field would involve:
a.Studies on ecogeographic distribution of target species
b.Understanding the population structure, dynamics and genetic variability within and between populations
c.Identification of threats to target species in the wild and actions to mitigate these threats
d.Management of natural ecosystem including establishment of genetic reserves, ecological restoration and species recovery plans
Plant genetic resources of crops and other major socio-economically valuable plant species are the biological base for food security and, directly or indirectly, support the livelihoods of every person on earth. Diversity of plant genetic resources is currently being lost in both the fields and the forests of rural people and in gene banks.
Promoting the conservation and sustainable utilization of the genetic diversity of crops and other major socio-economically valuable plant species will be essential as a basis to world food security and sustainable development. For conservation of the medicinal plant and traditional knowledge the following are important issues –
1.In situ conservation of the wild populations of medicinal plants:
This is essential in order to conserve their inter-and intra-specific diversity and to design a conservation programme in such a way that it also becomes a source of genuine and quality planting materials for user groups. The issue is of critical importance as it can ensure the long-term availability of medicinal plant resources of the country. It is well known that a cultivation programme needs the back up of germplasm banks in order to be viable because even if millions of hectares of selected varieties of various species are put under cultivation, the species can still go extinct in the wild. A well-designed community supported in situ conservation programme spread across the ecosystems of the country is the most cost-effective way to conserve the germplasm of the country’s medicinal plant resources.
2.Sustainable harvest of medicinal plants from the wild:
This issue is very important as currently, ninety percent of the raw material requirements of this sector are extracted from the wild. This harvest is to a large extent unregulated. Over-harvesting due to intensified local use or to meet commercial demand is becoming a growing problem. It is essential to therefore work towards a future scenario wherein 70 to 80 percent of the medicinal plant requirements will be met from cultivation but around 20 to 30 percent of the resources will still need to be sourced from the wild. In fact one third of the medicinal plants that are in trade involve non-destructive harvest, because the parts needed are fruits, flowers and leaves. A well-designed intervention based on the Joint Forest Management (JFM) system, is therefore needed to replace the current unregulated, illegal and often destructive harvest of medicinal plants from the wild.
3.Regulating trade in threatened and other wild species:
India does not yet have an institutionalised mechanism in place for identification of threatened species and their notification and for regulation of wild harvest. The wild populations of around 1000 species of medicinal plants are estimated to be under various degrees of threat. This issue needs to be urgently addressed in order to prevent medicinal plant species from going into extinction. Designing an institutionalized intervention in this regard is in fact an obligation to be met under the requirements of The Biodiversity Act (2002).
4.Mainstreaming traditional medicine into official primary health care programmes:
Today, the content of primary health care services delivered through district rural hospitals, block level primary health care centres and village cluster level primary health care units are all based almost entirely on western biomedicine. Despite the fact that there are safe and efficacious traditional herbal remedies for several primary health care problems, these remedies are not integrated into the primary health care programmes of state governments. This intervention will explore via pilot experiments the scope for judicious complementing of the existing primary health care services by adding inputs from the Indian Systems of Medicine (ISM). This kind of an integrated approach to primary health care has already been established in China and needs to be urgently put in place in India in order to improve the quality and lower the costs of primary health care services. It may also be rewarding to select a few reputed private health centres and work out with them a similar programme for integration of traditional medicine inputs in their health care services.
5.Revitalising local health cultures associated with medicinal plants:
Revitalising is relevant in the context of both health and livelihood security. It concerns the self-reliance of rural and urban households in dealing with common ailments, preventive and promotive health care without the aid of medical professionals and medical institutions. Today, despite pioneering small-scale NGO efforts there are no mainstream strategies for revitalisation of local health cultures associated with the use of ecosystem specific medicinal plants. These local community-based health cultures despite their widespread presence and enormous potential to contribute to the self-reliance of rural communities via home remedies, traditional health foods, customs and the services of a host of folk healers like traditional birth attendants, bone-setters, visha vaidyas, herbal healers, veterinary healers and millions of knowledgeable households are rapidly eroding. They were given no place in official health policy till the recent 2002 policy statement of the Government of India. The policy makes a specific mention of the need to revitalise local health traditions. There is however an urgent need to translate this recent policy into effective actions as these traditions are weakening in part due to the very marginal state patronage and support and for the other part due to the erosion of their natural resource base. Unless an effective plan and strategy for revitalising local health cultures is undertaken they are likely to be irretrievably lost with consequent debilitating effects both on the health security of millions of households, as well as on the conservation of local medicinal plant resources. It is well accepted today that cultural diversity and biodiversity go hand in hand and if we destroy one, the destruction of the other will follow.
6.Involving R & D Centres in the service of traditional medicine:
Involving R & D centres is important because certain sections of the public are looking for scientific explanations for traditional medical practices. It is however important to note that in fact traditional theory does provide explanation and validation for traditional practices. The problem however is that there is no bridge between traditional knowledge and modern science. It is therefore important to identify competent R & D laboratories and research centres that are prepared to dedicate a part of their professional services towards the revitalisation of local health cultures. These services are needed in areas such as product development, development of quality control standards, certification of raw materials and finished products and with respect to pre-clinical and clinical studies. It is however important to develop the modern parameters for best traditional practices based on the traditional theory and clinical practice in order to take advantage of the evolved understanding and the centuries of experience that underlie traditional healthcare. The challenge is to use modern tools creatively to explain traditional knowledge in order to improve the communication between the two knowledge systems.
7.Protection of community Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) related to folk knowledge of medicinal plants:
The relevance of this issue arises from the assumption that sizable economic benefits will accrue from large-scale commercialisation of TM knowledge. This raises the important issue of how best these benefits can be shared between innovators and the holders of Traditional Knowledge (TK). The Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) initiative of the GoI has so far only sought to digitise and protect the knowledge of medicinal plants derived from codified traditional medical systems from false IPR claims. Oral traditions of various ethnic communities are at present outside the purview of TKDL. The Biodiversity Act (2002) and the idea of Community Knowledge Register envisaged by it, can provide the opportunity of extending the scope of TKDL to local and community knowledge of medicinal plants. Unless this extension of TKDL is adopted, local health cultures will remain vulnerable to bio-piracy. Their systematic documentation is at this point of their history also an essential step for their revitalisation and use by future generations.
8.Contributing to broadening of the cultural and intellectual base of curricula:
This issue is important with respect to the school system as it can influence thousands of young minds and sensitise them to the contemporary relevance of traditional knowledge of medicinal plants. A similar intervention at another level is also relevant in medical colleges. In several medical schools abroad, education planners have already introduced a module on Complementary and Alternative Medicine into the syllabi. In India, which is home to such a rich medical heritage, introduction of a module on ISM into the syllabi of all medical colleges is perhaps long overdue.
9.Meeting unrealised rural livelihood potential:
Development of livelihoods targeted particularly on women and the rural poor is undoubtedly an important development objective in the context of poverty alleviation. A large rural employment potential through organising collection, cultivation and semi-processing of medicinal plants is latent in the projected growth of the herbal sector. One of the ways this can be realised is through community-owned enterprises. However for this potential to be achieved it needs systematic efforts at the grass roots for organising and training small and marginal farmers and Self-Help Women Groups, (SHWGs) to undertake organic cultivation and collection of medicinal plants. It is also necessary to build suitable infrastructure and provide quality know-how, under the auspices of a well-designed enterprise. Further, community-owned enterprises need whole-hearted support of the best R & D, financial and marketing agencies in order to function effectively.
Addressing policy issues: Successful interventions on the various issues outlined above will have significant policy implications in the forestry, health, R & D, IPR and rural employment sectors. These policy implications for the various sectors are outlined below:
Forestry - for in situ conservation, for sustainable harvest from the wild and for regulating trade in wild species.
Primary health care - for recognising the complementary role of Indian systems of medicine in primary health care.
R & D Institutions - for supporting the R & D needs of community-owned enterprises and local health cultures.
IPR - for extending IPR protection for informal Traditional Knowledge of local communities.
Rural employment - for encouraging financial institutions, corporates, fair trade organisations, rural development departments, private foundations and NGOs to proactively support the capacity building, finance and marketing needs of community owned enterprises of the rural poor.
Education – for enriching syllabi with inputs from Traditional Knowledge.
One of the Millennium Development Goals target focuses on maintaining species and ecosystem diversity, and it recognizes the central role that within species genetic diversity plays in improving production and use of crops and useful wild species. The need to conserve this genetic diversity has long been recognized and supported by national and international activities, particularly the Global Plan of Action. Target 9 creates the appropriate framework and objective to secure the diversity needed to achieve key CBD objectives and the Millennium Development Goals.
Although for crop plants, the emphasis to date has been on ex situ conservation, the value of maintaining crop genetic diversity in situ in production systems is being increasingly recognized. Farmers and rural people play a crucial role in the conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources on farm and in nature. The best of traditional knowledge and modern technologies will be needed to reach the target.
Natural ecosystems hold important socio-economically valuable plant species, including useful forestry species, endemic and threatened wild crop relatives, wild plants for food production and important medicinal and ornamental species. The genetic diversity of these species is essential to viable population maintenance and evolution, and is potentially an economically important component of natural ecosystems which cannot be maintained ex situ.
Unique and particularly diverse populations of these genetic resources must be protected in situ when they are under threat. This target will therefore be closely linked to other targets. Given the enormous loss and fragmentation of natural habitats that has occurred during the last century there is worldwide concern about the problem of species extinction. Medicinal plant resources also face this threat and more so because even today 90% of their use is based on harvest from the wild. Whereas cultivation can reduce the pressure on wild populations it cannot conserve the wild germplasm. There is growing understanding of the fact that in situ conservation of medicinal plants is the only solution, which can ensure their long-term availability.
References
Husain, H.J., Raina, A.K. and Phrasi, S.C.(2002), “Socio-economic Impact of Integrated Watershed Management” In: Resources Conservation and Watershed Management :Technology Options and Future Strategies (Eds) S.K.Dhyani, K.P.Tirphati, Ratan Singh, A. Raizada, N.K. Sharma, A.S. Mishra, S.S. Shrimali, B.L. Dhayani, A.R. Sharma and O.P.S. Khola. ICSWC, Dehradun, (India). pp 329-332.
Husain, H.J. and Raina, A.K. (2004) “Adoption of Agriculture Technology Before and After the introduction of Watershed Management Project Indian Journal of Forestry Vol. 27(2.) pp201
Prakash, Anand and Singh, K.K (2001) Use of medicinal plants by certain tribal people in North India. J.Trop, Med.Plants,2(2):225-229
Friday, August 14, 2009
Lack of Participation in Joint Forest Management and Income Generation
Abstract:
Present paper is illustrating the social analysis of Joint Forest Management (JFM). How, the lack in participation in JFM activities adversely affects the income generation of the people and which leads to failure of the project in several states. Social acceptability is the major criteria for the success of any community project and social acceptability depends upon needs and income generated by the project activities.
The study has been conducted with a combination of secondary as well as primary research. It has been normative but conclusive in nature. The complex nature of the study required a comprehensive secondary research followed by a multi stage primary research. In several states it is observed that income generation and basic needs are the basic yardstick to participate in the JFM. Lack of monitory benefits, forced the community to less participate in most states in India. The assets creation plays as catalyst in income generation and participation in over all.
Introduction
The increasing depletion of India's forest resources has brought into sharp focus the inherent inadequacy of traditional state owned and run systems of forest management in sustaining the forest resource base against the growing human and livestock population pressures, industrialization, urbanization, and overall economic development. Apart from developmental pressures, the dependence of forest user groups is a crucial factor in the state of India’s forests. Forest conservation priorities cannot be determined in isolation from local people and broader patterns of natural resource use, and this must be complimented by policies promoting sustainable and equitable development of the natural resource base as a whole. In acknowledging this factor, the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India issued policy guidelines for the involvement of village communities and voluntary agencies in the regeneration of degraded forest lands on 1 June 1990 under the JFM (Joint Forest Management) programme.
Participation in Historical Prospect
The concept of participation originated from the family systems and community living. Its history goes back to the period when the mother earth emerged with life. Since, time immemorial even the animals have been participating for their food, protection and normal living. The human being since its development started living together in community and probably this is why the proverb “Man is a social animal”. People participation is not a new concept and has its base in caring and sharing. In Indian context also participation has been a socio-political factor since time immemorial.
In Indian forestry context, participation had been talked and written about since 1950s. It is interesting to note that it was government which started organized participation in its development programmes and at a later stage civic societies caught up the idea and adopted it as an indispensable tool for programme implementation. The government through the initiative for the Panchayati Raj and other micro political systems has been encouraging and motivating community participation in its activity.
Participation the Conceptual Framework
Participation is conceived to be the most important tool for success of any community project. In forestry particularly JFMCs this is the core tool instrumental in guiding success of JFM. The concept of participation can be explained in a better way if talked into two parts (1) a psychological part (2) a physical part that is motivation and action being two critical parts of authentic participation. Action without motivation is not effective. Similarly, one may be highly motivated but does not do anything both these conditions can be termed as passive and active form of participation. Active participation can be said to be authentic when the participation has strong motivation as well.
Participation can only take place when the outsiders do not have a say in the ultimate power and decision making and actions, and the actual power and control is in the hands of those who will be actually affected by the decision. Therefore it can be said that minimum of these elements make participation authentic.
1)Motivation
2)Action
3)Control and power
Local community gets motivated to take part in action only when they have taken active part in goal setting and in decision making. But when outsiders set the goals and make decisions there is no development of motivation. They might resist as the decision taken by the outsiders may not be agreeable to them, therefore they do not own the project. In others words, ownership comes naturally when the local communities have taken active part in goal setting, decision making and in the action to implement the decisions made.
At the community level, a participation programmed takes the following course.
Motivation in the community to resolve an issue, achieve something useful.
Goal, objective setting by the entire community.
Taking part in decision making.
Taking part in action to implement the decision made.
Developing a feeling of ownership of the project.
Taking action to maintain the project output.
Participation in JFM
The forests management in India has traditionally been protection oriented. However, with increasing population the demand for forest based products started increasing and hence heavy biotic pressure on the forests. Resultantly, the Indian forests cover started declining and the traditional management system started getting questioned. Joint Forest Management emerged as both as alternative and supplement to the forest management systems in India and in organized way it found its beginning in Arabari in West Bengal during the mid 70s. Slowly it spread its wing and in many other places JFM came in existence on experimental basis. Gradually, it got attention of the policy makers and managers of forests and became watchword for sustainable development of forests. In 1990 the Government of India brought in a resolution on JFM and since then it got an organized shape with planning back up on national level. The different state governments went on adopting the JFM system for sustainable development of forests and the people independent on it.
JFM is a concept of developing partnerships between fringe forest user groups and the FD (forest department) on the basis of mutual trust and jointly defined roles and responsibilities with regard to forest protection and development. Under the JFM programme, the user and the owner (government) manage the resource and share the cost equally. The effective and meaningful involvement of local communities in evolving sustainable forest management systems is now being looked upon as a significant approach to address the longstanding problems of deforestation and land degradation in India. The linking of socio-economic incentives and forest development has been singularly instrumental in eliciting community participation. The institutional involvement in various forest protection and developmental activities has made promising impacts on the biophysical and socio-economic environment of the JFM areas. Currently, it is estimated that 10.24 million ha of forest lands are being managed under the JFM programme through 36,075 committees in 22 states. As a follow up, the Government of India issued guidelines on 21 February 2000 for strengthening of the JFM programme (Annexure A).
People's participation is now thought by many to be a prerequisite for sustainable development. There are, however, a variety of different interpretations of what "people's participation" and "participatory development" should and do mean in practice, ranging from "we want them to participate in what we do" to "we want to support them in the achievement of their goals".
Broadly speaking, depending on project objectives and strategies, two approaches can be distinguished. The first type is the "blueprint" or "target-oriented" approach, in which projects are defined in terms of mechanisms for the delivery of pre-defined packages of goods and services to specific target groups. Participation in this context is understood in terms of the willingness of people to undertake the required activities.
The second type can be called the "process-oriented" approach. In this approach, specific categories of activities are defined by the people themselves. This definition is made on the basis of local resources and needs, with support "facilitation" from the project. The technical message is not a uniform, pre-defined recipe but a "menu" with various options. Participation in this context is understood to mean that the people themselves assume ownership and accountability for activities, which they have identified and developed with the support of the project.
Approaches to Participation
(a)Participation takes place when most decisions about a project or an activity have already been made by administrators/technical people and the local community is induced to co-operate with them either by providing them incentives and subsidies or by using the threats to implement the project designed by the outsiders. Here, participation is used as a means to achieve goals and objectives already decided or set by project authorities. The control and decision making power remains with the project authorities as their resources are mainly involved. This approach is adopted by both the government and NGOs.
(b)Participation development takes place when people are given non directed education and they are mobilized and organized over a longer period of time to form their own organizations, realize their own potential and power and be self reliant– identify issues/ problems, set goals, make decisions and undertake activities on their own. In participatory development local resources are used and the local communities undertake activities which are within their capacity. They look to the state to provide resources from it to undertake activities which are beyond their capabilities. Even the resources provided by outsiders its use and management are controlled by the local community.
(c)The third approach could be that the project in which participation is initiated as a means could be made to become a participatory development project. Here the participation process is one in which decisions and actions to implement the decision are made jointly both by outsiders and local community.
Community Participation
Participation by community depends in multiple factors major being benefits, livelihood, culture, tradition, faith, process, institution building etc. Process of JFM does offer multiple opportunities to communities ranging from livelihood to socio-economic empowerments. However, it is livelihood framework which affects the participation most. People living in and around forest areas do not have adequate, educational facilities, and assets to reap the opportunities provided by JFM. Human development index is at its lowest in these areas. People still practice primitive subsistence, agriculture with very low productivity to meet their growing food grain requirements and they go in for more extensive cultivation inducting shifting cultivation, or encroachment of forest areas. Generally, homogeneity of group is considered as a pre-requisite to JFM initiation. However even in a small group homogeneity is hard to be found. People differ in their needs and assets and hence the differing motives. Developing belonging with forests is a self actualization type of need as described by Maslow. It is a need of highest order and there is no reason barring religious and cultural, why the people can feel attachment with forest in the absence of money factor.
Chambers RNG Conbey in 1992 in their work “Sustainable Rural Livelihood, practical concept for the 21st century” has defined livelihood framework. In his view, the livelihood approach is a way of thinking about the objectives, scope and priorities for development. In other words, it is a way putting people at the centre of development thereby increasing the effectiveness of development assistance. The full diversity and richness of livelihoods can be understood only by qualitative and participatory analysis. People have access to certain assets of poverty reducing factors. These gain their meaning and value through the prevailing social institution and organization environment. This environment also influences the livelihood strategy by ways of combining and using assets that are open to people in pursuit of beneficial livelihoods outcomes that meet their own livelihood objective. The major livelihood assets are:
•Human Capital
•Natural Capital
•Financial Capital
•Social Capital
•Physical Capital
Social Acceptability for Participation
The issue of social acceptability, in one form or another, has long been of interest to social scientists to evaluate the participation in any program. It has gained particular attention in the area of natural resource management as a result of growing incidences of political protest and intervention. For central forest management, the debate and uncertainty over adaptive and ecosystem based management approaches, and the conditions resulting from such practices, have raised to new prominence concerns about public acceptance. To meet the objectives of ecosystem management, however problematic the definition, forestry professionals need to understand how natural systems function and are sustained; however, they also need to understand how people interpret and respond to changes in forest settings, policy decisions, and management institutions.
The concept of social acceptability of natural resource management can be traced to the work of rural sociologist Firey (1960), who was interested in understanding why certain resource practices and prescriptions in different societies persisted, whereas others did not. He concluded that the adoption and retention of any particular resource program or action depends on the extent to which that activity satisfies three key requisites:
• Physically possible: practices are consistent with ecological processes.
• Economically feasible: practices generate revenue in excess of costs.
• Culturally adoptable: practices are consistent with prevailing social customs and norms.
Clawson (1975) introduced a similar premise focused more directly on forest environments but provided a more detailed set of criteria than Firey by arguing that successful policies must meet five conditions:
(1) Biological and physical feasibility,
(2) Economic efficiency,
(3) Economic welfare or equity,
(4) Social or cultural acceptability, and
(5) Operational or administrative practicality.
Forest Policy Process Gap and Participation
From a mechanistic standpoint, agency staff also have mastered the traditional scoping process by which the public can provide input on a plan or project, but these sessions frequently are sterile, rule bound, one way exchanges (Cortner et al. 1996); they represent what has become known in some western communities as the “three is” of federal public involvement: i.e., inform the public, solicit their input, and then ignore it (Shindler and Neburka 1997).
Alternatively, mistrust is the dark heart of wicked problems (King 1993). Research from forest and range communities confirms the importance of a genuine participation process in building trustworthy relations. Effective, trustworthy relations could be organized around six common factors:
(1) Inclusiveness,
(2) Sincere leadership,
(3) Innovative and flexible methods,
(4) Early commitment and continuity,
(5) Sound organizational and planning skills, and
(6) Efforts that result in action.
National Scenario
The Seventy Third Amendments is not applicable in the Scheduled Areas. Scheduled Areas were excluded to preserve the social customs and traditions of the tribals. These areas lay in nine states- Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Orissa, Jharkhand, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. In 1996, the Panchayats Extension to the Scheduled Areas (PESA) Act extended the provisions of the Seventy Third Amendment to Scheduled areas and provided extensive powers to Gram Sabhas (general body of the village Panchayat) for management of natural resources on areas under their jurisdiction. PESA mandated the states to enact their Panchayat legislation's in consonance with the customary laws and traditional management practices of community resources. In retrospect, if one tries to understand the factors that contributed to the change by each of the stakeholder groups, they can be summarizing as under:
•Regular discussion and debate on all matters concerned, despite the differences
•Space for different viewpoints/ approaches and each respecting the other
•Ability and maturity of groups having different viewpoints to see that even the most serious differences do not adversely affect the overall process
• Focusing only on the JFM related matters while interacting with the FD
Form what one can observe from a distance, it is evident that the leadership provided by the FD has contributed a lot to the change of attitude towards NGOs among FD officials at different levels. The Following factors have contributed to relationship building:
• Initiative and the ability of leadership to bring in and take forward the 'change'
• Active participation with open minds in all joint/multi-stakeholder meetings, organized by NGOs and FD
• Explaining FD's intentions, as ,many times as required, to dispel the fears expressed
• Offering clarifications in both formal and informal settings on issues of controversial nature
• Willingness to accept suggestions and issue appropriate circulars to improve implementation at field level, especially in applying the JFMGC to all VSSs in the state irrespective of source of funding
• Ability to appreciate and respect views of NGOs even when there is disagreement with the same, from the FD's point of view
• The World Bank project catalyst, stimulating the process
• The monitoring mechanism of the Bank has built in provisions to look into all relevant aspects
• The willingness of the task manager and the team members, especially during the formulation of the second phase project, to take cognizance of the issues flagged and to try and ensure that the same get addressed in the subsequent planning/ monitoring
Status of JFM Committees
The legal status of JFM committees, the powers they posses to carry out their daily patrolling activities for sharing benefits and, for taking recourse to legal action to protect their own interests, are crucial issues. Field visits have indicated that when the members of protection committees sought to fine offenders, found illicitly felling wood in contravention of rules, they were often challenged and threatened with legal action. In practice, however, it was found that many successful VFCs function by imposing such fines which act as a deterrent to forest violators while the Indian Forest Act does not recognise these functions of the VFCs.
National Legal and Policy Framework
Under the Indian Constitution, national and state governments share jurisdiction for forestry. The centre generally sets the broad national policy and legal framework and supporting statutes. Three major national laws governing forestry have been promulgated over the past 127 years: the Indian Forest Act of 1878, the Indian Forest Act of 1927, and the Forest Conservation Act of 1980. Three key forest policy pronouncements have been made in independent India: the Forest Policy of 1952, the National Commission on Agriculture of 1976, and the 1988 Forest Policy. Another law, the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, is also important, since there is interaction and various contradictions between this act and the more traditional forestry acts for communities located in and adjacent to protected areas. A proposed Scheduled Tribes Bill (2005) would recognize historic land rights held by tribal people in scheduled areas to an upper limit of 2.5 hectares per family.
Analysis of Participation
The past decade has witnessed a fundamental shift in many areas of forestry and biodiversity conservation from centralized planning by government agencies to more participatory approaches that take into account the varying needs and interests of forest users. One reason for this shift is growing recognition by policymakers and planners of the multiple environmental, economic, and social values of forest resources. While national policymakers remain interested in generating economic benefits from forests, they also realize the important role that forests play in preserving biodiversity, protecting critical watersheds, and providing livelihoods. Thus, policymakers are becoming increasingly aware that forests are important public commodities that meet the demands of multiple, and often competing, users. Participation in forestry and conservation management refers to the active involvement of various stakeholders in defining forest sector and conservation objectives, determining beneficiaries, managing forest resources, resolving conflicts over forest uses, and monitoring and evaluating the performance of forestry and biodiversity conservation projects. Stakeholders are those who have an interest in or are potentially affected by forest and conservation policies and projects.
Limitations of Participation
Participation is not a panacea for the many problems facing the forest sector, and like all approaches, has its limits. Participatory approaches have not worked in some areas because of conflicts over forest resources, dispersed population structure, or the history of forest ownership patterns and use. At the national level, there may be powerful interests or prejudices against reforming forest and environmental policies and devolving authority to a broader range of forest users. Policy reform, in forestry as well as in other sectors, is a slow, difficult, and costly process that may not be consistent with the urgent need to slow forest loss and degradation. Government agencies, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) also have different capacities and different incentives for promoting broad stakeholder and local participation. For example, governments and NGOs often need assistance in developing appropriate technologies and improving organizational skills, while forest industries may have the expertise, but perhaps limited interest in addressing environmental and social objectives.
Reference:
Chambers, R., 1992.Rural Appraisal: Rapid Relaud and Participatory. Institute of Development Studies Discussion Paper 311, University of Sussex, England,
Clawson, M. 1975. Forest for whom and for what? Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Cortner, H.J.; Shannon, M.;Wallace, M. [et al.]. 1996. Institutional barriers and incentives for ecosystem management: a problem analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR- 354. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 35 p.
Firey, W. 1960. Man, mind, and land. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. 256 p.
King, J. 1993. Learning to solve the right problems: the case of nuclear power in America. Journal of Business Ethics. 13: 105-116.
Shindler, B. 1997. Public perspectives on prescribed fire and mechanical thinning. Tech. Note BMNRI-TN-9. La Grande, Or: Blue Mountains Natural Resources Institute. 4 p.
Present paper is illustrating the social analysis of Joint Forest Management (JFM). How, the lack in participation in JFM activities adversely affects the income generation of the people and which leads to failure of the project in several states. Social acceptability is the major criteria for the success of any community project and social acceptability depends upon needs and income generated by the project activities.
The study has been conducted with a combination of secondary as well as primary research. It has been normative but conclusive in nature. The complex nature of the study required a comprehensive secondary research followed by a multi stage primary research. In several states it is observed that income generation and basic needs are the basic yardstick to participate in the JFM. Lack of monitory benefits, forced the community to less participate in most states in India. The assets creation plays as catalyst in income generation and participation in over all.
Introduction
The increasing depletion of India's forest resources has brought into sharp focus the inherent inadequacy of traditional state owned and run systems of forest management in sustaining the forest resource base against the growing human and livestock population pressures, industrialization, urbanization, and overall economic development. Apart from developmental pressures, the dependence of forest user groups is a crucial factor in the state of India’s forests. Forest conservation priorities cannot be determined in isolation from local people and broader patterns of natural resource use, and this must be complimented by policies promoting sustainable and equitable development of the natural resource base as a whole. In acknowledging this factor, the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India issued policy guidelines for the involvement of village communities and voluntary agencies in the regeneration of degraded forest lands on 1 June 1990 under the JFM (Joint Forest Management) programme.
Participation in Historical Prospect
The concept of participation originated from the family systems and community living. Its history goes back to the period when the mother earth emerged with life. Since, time immemorial even the animals have been participating for their food, protection and normal living. The human being since its development started living together in community and probably this is why the proverb “Man is a social animal”. People participation is not a new concept and has its base in caring and sharing. In Indian context also participation has been a socio-political factor since time immemorial.
In Indian forestry context, participation had been talked and written about since 1950s. It is interesting to note that it was government which started organized participation in its development programmes and at a later stage civic societies caught up the idea and adopted it as an indispensable tool for programme implementation. The government through the initiative for the Panchayati Raj and other micro political systems has been encouraging and motivating community participation in its activity.
Participation the Conceptual Framework
Participation is conceived to be the most important tool for success of any community project. In forestry particularly JFMCs this is the core tool instrumental in guiding success of JFM. The concept of participation can be explained in a better way if talked into two parts (1) a psychological part (2) a physical part that is motivation and action being two critical parts of authentic participation. Action without motivation is not effective. Similarly, one may be highly motivated but does not do anything both these conditions can be termed as passive and active form of participation. Active participation can be said to be authentic when the participation has strong motivation as well.
Participation can only take place when the outsiders do not have a say in the ultimate power and decision making and actions, and the actual power and control is in the hands of those who will be actually affected by the decision. Therefore it can be said that minimum of these elements make participation authentic.
1)Motivation
2)Action
3)Control and power
Local community gets motivated to take part in action only when they have taken active part in goal setting and in decision making. But when outsiders set the goals and make decisions there is no development of motivation. They might resist as the decision taken by the outsiders may not be agreeable to them, therefore they do not own the project. In others words, ownership comes naturally when the local communities have taken active part in goal setting, decision making and in the action to implement the decisions made.
At the community level, a participation programmed takes the following course.
Motivation in the community to resolve an issue, achieve something useful.
Goal, objective setting by the entire community.
Taking part in decision making.
Taking part in action to implement the decision made.
Developing a feeling of ownership of the project.
Taking action to maintain the project output.
Participation in JFM
The forests management in India has traditionally been protection oriented. However, with increasing population the demand for forest based products started increasing and hence heavy biotic pressure on the forests. Resultantly, the Indian forests cover started declining and the traditional management system started getting questioned. Joint Forest Management emerged as both as alternative and supplement to the forest management systems in India and in organized way it found its beginning in Arabari in West Bengal during the mid 70s. Slowly it spread its wing and in many other places JFM came in existence on experimental basis. Gradually, it got attention of the policy makers and managers of forests and became watchword for sustainable development of forests. In 1990 the Government of India brought in a resolution on JFM and since then it got an organized shape with planning back up on national level. The different state governments went on adopting the JFM system for sustainable development of forests and the people independent on it.
JFM is a concept of developing partnerships between fringe forest user groups and the FD (forest department) on the basis of mutual trust and jointly defined roles and responsibilities with regard to forest protection and development. Under the JFM programme, the user and the owner (government) manage the resource and share the cost equally. The effective and meaningful involvement of local communities in evolving sustainable forest management systems is now being looked upon as a significant approach to address the longstanding problems of deforestation and land degradation in India. The linking of socio-economic incentives and forest development has been singularly instrumental in eliciting community participation. The institutional involvement in various forest protection and developmental activities has made promising impacts on the biophysical and socio-economic environment of the JFM areas. Currently, it is estimated that 10.24 million ha of forest lands are being managed under the JFM programme through 36,075 committees in 22 states. As a follow up, the Government of India issued guidelines on 21 February 2000 for strengthening of the JFM programme (Annexure A).
People's participation is now thought by many to be a prerequisite for sustainable development. There are, however, a variety of different interpretations of what "people's participation" and "participatory development" should and do mean in practice, ranging from "we want them to participate in what we do" to "we want to support them in the achievement of their goals".
Broadly speaking, depending on project objectives and strategies, two approaches can be distinguished. The first type is the "blueprint" or "target-oriented" approach, in which projects are defined in terms of mechanisms for the delivery of pre-defined packages of goods and services to specific target groups. Participation in this context is understood in terms of the willingness of people to undertake the required activities.
The second type can be called the "process-oriented" approach. In this approach, specific categories of activities are defined by the people themselves. This definition is made on the basis of local resources and needs, with support "facilitation" from the project. The technical message is not a uniform, pre-defined recipe but a "menu" with various options. Participation in this context is understood to mean that the people themselves assume ownership and accountability for activities, which they have identified and developed with the support of the project.
Approaches to Participation
(a)Participation takes place when most decisions about a project or an activity have already been made by administrators/technical people and the local community is induced to co-operate with them either by providing them incentives and subsidies or by using the threats to implement the project designed by the outsiders. Here, participation is used as a means to achieve goals and objectives already decided or set by project authorities. The control and decision making power remains with the project authorities as their resources are mainly involved. This approach is adopted by both the government and NGOs.
(b)Participation development takes place when people are given non directed education and they are mobilized and organized over a longer period of time to form their own organizations, realize their own potential and power and be self reliant– identify issues/ problems, set goals, make decisions and undertake activities on their own. In participatory development local resources are used and the local communities undertake activities which are within their capacity. They look to the state to provide resources from it to undertake activities which are beyond their capabilities. Even the resources provided by outsiders its use and management are controlled by the local community.
(c)The third approach could be that the project in which participation is initiated as a means could be made to become a participatory development project. Here the participation process is one in which decisions and actions to implement the decision are made jointly both by outsiders and local community.
Community Participation
Participation by community depends in multiple factors major being benefits, livelihood, culture, tradition, faith, process, institution building etc. Process of JFM does offer multiple opportunities to communities ranging from livelihood to socio-economic empowerments. However, it is livelihood framework which affects the participation most. People living in and around forest areas do not have adequate, educational facilities, and assets to reap the opportunities provided by JFM. Human development index is at its lowest in these areas. People still practice primitive subsistence, agriculture with very low productivity to meet their growing food grain requirements and they go in for more extensive cultivation inducting shifting cultivation, or encroachment of forest areas. Generally, homogeneity of group is considered as a pre-requisite to JFM initiation. However even in a small group homogeneity is hard to be found. People differ in their needs and assets and hence the differing motives. Developing belonging with forests is a self actualization type of need as described by Maslow. It is a need of highest order and there is no reason barring religious and cultural, why the people can feel attachment with forest in the absence of money factor.
Chambers RNG Conbey in 1992 in their work “Sustainable Rural Livelihood, practical concept for the 21st century” has defined livelihood framework. In his view, the livelihood approach is a way of thinking about the objectives, scope and priorities for development. In other words, it is a way putting people at the centre of development thereby increasing the effectiveness of development assistance. The full diversity and richness of livelihoods can be understood only by qualitative and participatory analysis. People have access to certain assets of poverty reducing factors. These gain their meaning and value through the prevailing social institution and organization environment. This environment also influences the livelihood strategy by ways of combining and using assets that are open to people in pursuit of beneficial livelihoods outcomes that meet their own livelihood objective. The major livelihood assets are:
•Human Capital
•Natural Capital
•Financial Capital
•Social Capital
•Physical Capital
Social Acceptability for Participation
The issue of social acceptability, in one form or another, has long been of interest to social scientists to evaluate the participation in any program. It has gained particular attention in the area of natural resource management as a result of growing incidences of political protest and intervention. For central forest management, the debate and uncertainty over adaptive and ecosystem based management approaches, and the conditions resulting from such practices, have raised to new prominence concerns about public acceptance. To meet the objectives of ecosystem management, however problematic the definition, forestry professionals need to understand how natural systems function and are sustained; however, they also need to understand how people interpret and respond to changes in forest settings, policy decisions, and management institutions.
The concept of social acceptability of natural resource management can be traced to the work of rural sociologist Firey (1960), who was interested in understanding why certain resource practices and prescriptions in different societies persisted, whereas others did not. He concluded that the adoption and retention of any particular resource program or action depends on the extent to which that activity satisfies three key requisites:
• Physically possible: practices are consistent with ecological processes.
• Economically feasible: practices generate revenue in excess of costs.
• Culturally adoptable: practices are consistent with prevailing social customs and norms.
Clawson (1975) introduced a similar premise focused more directly on forest environments but provided a more detailed set of criteria than Firey by arguing that successful policies must meet five conditions:
(1) Biological and physical feasibility,
(2) Economic efficiency,
(3) Economic welfare or equity,
(4) Social or cultural acceptability, and
(5) Operational or administrative practicality.
Forest Policy Process Gap and Participation
From a mechanistic standpoint, agency staff also have mastered the traditional scoping process by which the public can provide input on a plan or project, but these sessions frequently are sterile, rule bound, one way exchanges (Cortner et al. 1996); they represent what has become known in some western communities as the “three is” of federal public involvement: i.e., inform the public, solicit their input, and then ignore it (Shindler and Neburka 1997).
Alternatively, mistrust is the dark heart of wicked problems (King 1993). Research from forest and range communities confirms the importance of a genuine participation process in building trustworthy relations. Effective, trustworthy relations could be organized around six common factors:
(1) Inclusiveness,
(2) Sincere leadership,
(3) Innovative and flexible methods,
(4) Early commitment and continuity,
(5) Sound organizational and planning skills, and
(6) Efforts that result in action.
National Scenario
The Seventy Third Amendments is not applicable in the Scheduled Areas. Scheduled Areas were excluded to preserve the social customs and traditions of the tribals. These areas lay in nine states- Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Orissa, Jharkhand, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. In 1996, the Panchayats Extension to the Scheduled Areas (PESA) Act extended the provisions of the Seventy Third Amendment to Scheduled areas and provided extensive powers to Gram Sabhas (general body of the village Panchayat) for management of natural resources on areas under their jurisdiction. PESA mandated the states to enact their Panchayat legislation's in consonance with the customary laws and traditional management practices of community resources. In retrospect, if one tries to understand the factors that contributed to the change by each of the stakeholder groups, they can be summarizing as under:
•Regular discussion and debate on all matters concerned, despite the differences
•Space for different viewpoints/ approaches and each respecting the other
•Ability and maturity of groups having different viewpoints to see that even the most serious differences do not adversely affect the overall process
• Focusing only on the JFM related matters while interacting with the FD
Form what one can observe from a distance, it is evident that the leadership provided by the FD has contributed a lot to the change of attitude towards NGOs among FD officials at different levels. The Following factors have contributed to relationship building:
• Initiative and the ability of leadership to bring in and take forward the 'change'
• Active participation with open minds in all joint/multi-stakeholder meetings, organized by NGOs and FD
• Explaining FD's intentions, as ,many times as required, to dispel the fears expressed
• Offering clarifications in both formal and informal settings on issues of controversial nature
• Willingness to accept suggestions and issue appropriate circulars to improve implementation at field level, especially in applying the JFMGC to all VSSs in the state irrespective of source of funding
• Ability to appreciate and respect views of NGOs even when there is disagreement with the same, from the FD's point of view
• The World Bank project catalyst, stimulating the process
• The monitoring mechanism of the Bank has built in provisions to look into all relevant aspects
• The willingness of the task manager and the team members, especially during the formulation of the second phase project, to take cognizance of the issues flagged and to try and ensure that the same get addressed in the subsequent planning/ monitoring
Status of JFM Committees
The legal status of JFM committees, the powers they posses to carry out their daily patrolling activities for sharing benefits and, for taking recourse to legal action to protect their own interests, are crucial issues. Field visits have indicated that when the members of protection committees sought to fine offenders, found illicitly felling wood in contravention of rules, they were often challenged and threatened with legal action. In practice, however, it was found that many successful VFCs function by imposing such fines which act as a deterrent to forest violators while the Indian Forest Act does not recognise these functions of the VFCs.
National Legal and Policy Framework
Under the Indian Constitution, national and state governments share jurisdiction for forestry. The centre generally sets the broad national policy and legal framework and supporting statutes. Three major national laws governing forestry have been promulgated over the past 127 years: the Indian Forest Act of 1878, the Indian Forest Act of 1927, and the Forest Conservation Act of 1980. Three key forest policy pronouncements have been made in independent India: the Forest Policy of 1952, the National Commission on Agriculture of 1976, and the 1988 Forest Policy. Another law, the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, is also important, since there is interaction and various contradictions between this act and the more traditional forestry acts for communities located in and adjacent to protected areas. A proposed Scheduled Tribes Bill (2005) would recognize historic land rights held by tribal people in scheduled areas to an upper limit of 2.5 hectares per family.
Analysis of Participation
The past decade has witnessed a fundamental shift in many areas of forestry and biodiversity conservation from centralized planning by government agencies to more participatory approaches that take into account the varying needs and interests of forest users. One reason for this shift is growing recognition by policymakers and planners of the multiple environmental, economic, and social values of forest resources. While national policymakers remain interested in generating economic benefits from forests, they also realize the important role that forests play in preserving biodiversity, protecting critical watersheds, and providing livelihoods. Thus, policymakers are becoming increasingly aware that forests are important public commodities that meet the demands of multiple, and often competing, users. Participation in forestry and conservation management refers to the active involvement of various stakeholders in defining forest sector and conservation objectives, determining beneficiaries, managing forest resources, resolving conflicts over forest uses, and monitoring and evaluating the performance of forestry and biodiversity conservation projects. Stakeholders are those who have an interest in or are potentially affected by forest and conservation policies and projects.
Limitations of Participation
Participation is not a panacea for the many problems facing the forest sector, and like all approaches, has its limits. Participatory approaches have not worked in some areas because of conflicts over forest resources, dispersed population structure, or the history of forest ownership patterns and use. At the national level, there may be powerful interests or prejudices against reforming forest and environmental policies and devolving authority to a broader range of forest users. Policy reform, in forestry as well as in other sectors, is a slow, difficult, and costly process that may not be consistent with the urgent need to slow forest loss and degradation. Government agencies, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) also have different capacities and different incentives for promoting broad stakeholder and local participation. For example, governments and NGOs often need assistance in developing appropriate technologies and improving organizational skills, while forest industries may have the expertise, but perhaps limited interest in addressing environmental and social objectives.
Reference:
Chambers, R., 1992.Rural Appraisal: Rapid Relaud and Participatory. Institute of Development Studies Discussion Paper 311, University of Sussex, England,
Clawson, M. 1975. Forest for whom and for what? Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Cortner, H.J.; Shannon, M.;Wallace, M. [et al.]. 1996. Institutional barriers and incentives for ecosystem management: a problem analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR- 354. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 35 p.
Firey, W. 1960. Man, mind, and land. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. 256 p.
King, J. 1993. Learning to solve the right problems: the case of nuclear power in America. Journal of Business Ethics. 13: 105-116.
Shindler, B. 1997. Public perspectives on prescribed fire and mechanical thinning. Tech. Note BMNRI-TN-9. La Grande, Or: Blue Mountains Natural Resources Institute. 4 p.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
