期刊文献+

Institutional arrangement and typology of community forests of Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland of North-East India 被引量:2

Institutional arrangement and typology of community forests of Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland of North-East India
下载PDF
导出
摘要 Most community forests in hill regions of northeast India have been managed by traditional local institutions for centuries and most of these institutions remain functional even today. Higher forest coverage on private and community lands as compared to government land indicates that traditional institutions effectively manage community forests in the region. The present study was conducted through a survey of literature and field work using participatory research tools viz., PRA exercises, group discussions and questionnaire interviews with key informants in northeast India. We categorized the institutions involved in conservation and management of forests into three major types: traditional, quasi-traditional and modern. Traditional institutions with hierarchal structure were found in all states and are intact and functional in the state of Meghalaya. Quasi-traditional institutions, a blend of traditional and modern institutions were prevalent in Nagaland while modern institutions have almost replaced traditional institutions in Mizoram. We recorded at least eleven types of community forests viz., group of village forest, village forest, restricted forest, sacred forest, clan forest, cemetery forest, regeneration forest, bamboo forest, recreation forest, village reserved forest and medicinal plantation in villages of three states. The tribal people, through long-term trial and error experiments, have developed an elaborate, functional and generally democratic system of conservation and management of forests and associated natural ecosystems. Several forest and natural resource management lessons can be learnt from the institutional structure and decision making system of the evolving and dynamic institutions of tribal communities of the region. Most community forests in hill regions of northeast India have been managed by traditional local institutions for centuries and most of these institutions remain functional even today. Higher forest coverage on private and community lands as compared to government land indicates that traditional institutions effectively manage community forests in the region. The present study was conducted through a survey of literature and field work using participatory research tools viz., PRA exercises, group discussions and questionnaire interviews with key informants in northeast India. We categorized the institutions involved in conservation and management of forests into three major types: traditional, quasi-traditional and modern. Traditional institutions with hierarchal structure were found in all states and are intact and functional in the state of Meghalaya. Quasi-traditional institutions, a blend of traditional and modern institutions were prevalent in Nagaland while modern institutions have almost replaced traditional institutions in Mizoram. We recorded at least eleven types of community forests viz., group of village forest, village forest, restricted forest, sacred forest, clan forest, cemetery forest, regeneration forest, bamboo forest, recreation forest, village reserved forest and medicinal plantation in villages of three states. The tribal people, through long-term trial and error experiments, have developed an elaborate, functional and generally democratic system of conservation and management of forests and associated natural ecosystems. Several forest and natural resource management lessons can be learnt from the institutional structure and decision making system of the evolving and dynamic institutions of tribal communities of the region.
出处 《Journal of Forestry Research》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2013年第1期179-186,共8页 林业研究(英文版)
关键词 sustainable natural resources community institution: tribal sustainable natural resources community, institution: tribal
  • 相关文献

参考文献35

  • 1Agarwal A,Chhatre A. State involvement and forest co-governance:evidence from the Indian Himalayas[J].St Comp Int Dev,2007.67-86.
  • 2Agrawal A,Ostrom E. Collective action,property rights,and decentralization in resource use in India and Nepal[J].Politic Soc,2001.485-514.
  • 3Arnold JEM,Campbell JG. Collective management of hill forests in Nepal:the community forestry development project[A].Washington,DC:National Academy Press,1986.425-454.
  • 4Barik SK,Tiwari BK. Forest policies and schemes[A].Bhubaneswar:Graftek Pvt.Ltd,2004.22-108.
  • 5Brockington D. Forests,community conservation,and local government performance:the village forest reserves of Tanzania[J].Society and Natural Resources,2007.835-848.
  • 6Chakraborty RN. Stability and outcomes of common property institutions in forestry:evidence from the Terai region of Nepal[J].Ecological Economics,2001.341-353.
  • 7Chatterjee S,Dey S,Rana RS,Sastry ARK. Conservation and Sustainable use of natural bioresources:A case study on Apanati in Arunachal Pradesh[M].New Delhi:World Wide Fund for Nature-India,2000.19-32.
  • 8Dasgupta S,Ahmed FU. Natural Resources Management by Tribal Community:a Case Study of Bangladesh[M].The World Bank/WBI"s CBNRM,1998.
  • 9Edmonds EV. Government tnitiated community resource management and local resource extraction from Nepal's Forests[J].Journal of Development Economics,2002.89-115.
  • 10FSI(Forest Survey of India). State of the Forest Report[R].Dehradun:FSI,2009.

同被引文献2

引证文献2

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部