Advertisement

Denial of Rights Continues: How Legislation for ‘Democratic Decentralisation’ of Forest Governance was Subverted in the Implementation Process of the Forest Rights Act in India

  • Bidhan Kanti DasEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

It is argued that, in the absence of legislation, the outcome of decentralisation initiatives in forestry remains limited in terms of devolution of power and assigning authority to politically weak forest-dependent communities are concerned. In this context, the ongoing implementation process of the Forest Rights Act provides an opportunity to examine the institutional arrangements for devolution of power and authority, and measures the extent to which this Act offers space for democratic and inclusive forest governance by the local people. Based on micro-level field work in parts of West Bengal, India, the paper argues that understanding roles of institutions under ‘democratic decentralisation’ framework is not enough for meaningful democratic decentralisation, particularly for forest resources. If democratic decentralisation of natural resources is to succeed, a variety of factors embedded in the institutions, like actor, power and accountability, is to be recognised.

Keywords

Democratic decentralisation Forest governance FRA Forest dwellers India 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper is based on the minor research project entitled “Understanding Implementation process of FRA 2006 in Odisha and West Bengal”, sponsored by the Rabindranath Tagore Centre for Human Development Studies, Kolkata. I would like to acknowledge the support of Professor Achin Chakraborty, Director, Institute of Development Studies Kolkata, and thank Basudev Banerjee for his research assistance.

References

  1. Agarwal, A., and J. Ribot. 1999. Accountability in decentralisation: A framework with South Asian and African cases. Journal of Developing Areas 33: 473–502.Google Scholar
  2. Agrawal, A. 1999. Decentralisation in Nepal: A comparative perspective. San Francisco: ICS Press.Google Scholar
  3. Banerjee, A., S. Ghosh, and O. Springate-Baginski. 2010. Obstructed access to forest justice in West Bengal: State violations in the mis-implementation of the Forest Rights Act 2006. IPPG Discussion paper series, August 2010.Google Scholar
  4. Baviskar, A. 2004. Between micro-politics and administrative imperatives: Decentralisation and the Watershed Mission in Madhya Pradesh. European Journal of Development Research 16 (1): 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bera, S. 2013. Battle for Niyamguri: Results from India’s first referendum: 12 Nays, 0 Ayes. Down to Earth, 25 July 2013.Google Scholar
  6. Berry, S. 1993. No condition is permanent: The social dynamics of Agrarian change in Sub Saharan Africa. Madison and London: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  7. Berry, S. 1997. Tomatoes, land and hearsay: property and history in Asante in the time of structural adjustment. World Development 25 (8): 1225–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chakrabarti, B. 2012. Contested Identity of Jangle Mahal Maoists: State hegemony, political theatre and the process alternative representation. The Eastern Anthropologist 65 (1): 1–14.Google Scholar
  9. Cleaver, F. 2000. Moral ecological rationality, institutions and the management of common property resources. Development and Change 31 (2): 361–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crook, R.C., and J. Manor. 1998. Democracy and decentralisation in south East Asia and West Africa: Participation, accountability and performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. CSD. 2010. Summary Report on Implementation of the Forest Rights Act. Delhi: Centre for Sustainable Development. http://www.forestrightsact.com/component/k2/item/15, Accessed on 5 April 2015.
  12. Das, B.K. 2017. Forest Rights Act 2006 Implementation process: A comparison between West Bengal and Odisha. Kolkata: Tagore Centre for Human Development Studies and Institute of Development Studies Kolkata.Google Scholar
  13. Das, T., and A. Kothari. 2014. Forest rights and conservation in India. In Rights and responsibilities, ed. H. Jonas, H. Jonas, and S.M. Subramanian. New York: Natural Justice and United Nations University.Google Scholar
  14. Desor, S. 2013. Community forest rights under Forest Rights Act: Citizen’s Report 2013. New Delhi: Kalpavriksh and Vasundhara.Google Scholar
  15. Edmunds, D., and E. Wollenberg (eds.). 2003. Local forest management: The impact of devolution policies. London: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  16. GOI. 2006. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, No. 2 of 2007. The Gazette of India; Government of India, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  17. Hickey, S., and G. Mohan. 2005. Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? Exploring New approaches to Participation in Development. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  18. Jha, S. 2010. Process betrays the spirit: Forest Rights Act in Bengal. Economic and Political Weekly 45 (33): 24–27.Google Scholar
  19. Joshi, S. 2003. Deep in the woods. New Delhi: Down To Earth.Google Scholar
  20. Jena, M. 2010. Law on Forest Rights Fails to Deliver. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50652, Accessed on 21 September 2015.
  21. Jain, S. 2006. ‘Green Light for Tribal Bill Changes’, Indian Express, December 3.Google Scholar
  22. Kashwan, P. 2013. The politics of rights based approaches in conservation. Land Use Policy 31: 613–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Klooster, D. 2000. Institutional choice, community and struggle: A case study of forest co management in Mexico. World Development 28 (1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kumar, K., N.M. Singh, and Y.G. Rao. 2017. Promise and performance of the forest rights act: A ten year review. Economic and Political Weekly 52: 40–43.Google Scholar
  25. Kumar, K., and J.M. Kerr. 2012. Democratic Assertions: The making of India’s recognition of forest rights Act. Development and Change 43 (3): 751–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kumar, K., N.M. Singh, and J.M. Kerr. 2015. Decentralisation and democratic forest reforms in India: Moving to a right based approach. Forest Policy and Economics 51: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Larson, A.M., and J.C. Ribot. 2004. Democratic decentralisation through natural resource lens: Countering central resistance, fostering local demand. European Journal of Development Research 16 (1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Larson, A. 2003. Decentralisation and forest management in Latin America: Towards a working model? Public Administration and Development 23: 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leach, M., R. Mearns, and I. Scoones. 1999. Environmental entitlements: Dynamics and institutions in community based natural resource management. World Development 27 (2): 225–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mahapatra, R., K.S. Srivastava, S. Narayanan, and A. Pallavi. 2010. How government subverting forest rights act. New Delhi: Down to Earth.Google Scholar
  31. Meynen, W., and M. Dornbos. 2004. Decentralizing natural resource management: A recipe for sustainability and Equity. European Journal of Development Research 16 (1): 225–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mosse, D. 1997. The symbolic making of common property resource: History, ecology and locality in a tank irrigated landscape in south India. Development and Change 28 (3): 467–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Muherezza, F.E. 2003. Environmental decentralisation and the management of forest resources in Masindi district, Uganda. Environmental governance in Africa, Working paper no 8.Washington: Institutions and Governance programme, World Resource Institute.Google Scholar
  34. Munster, U., and S. Vishnudas. 2012. In the Jungle of Law: Adivasi rights and implementation of forest rights act in Kerala. Economic and Political Weekly 47 (19): 38–45.Google Scholar
  35. Planning Commission. 2011. Report of sub group I on Forestry in Forests and Sustainable Management of natural resources. Report of the Working for the Twelfth Five Year plan (2012–2017). New Delhi.Google Scholar
  36. Pratap, D. 2010. Community participation and forest policies in India: An overview. Social Change 40 (3): 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ramdas, S.R. 2009. Women, forest spaces and the Law: Transgressing the boundaries. Economic and Political Weekly 44: 65–73.Google Scholar
  38. Ramnath, M. 2008. Surviving the Forest rights Act: Between Scylla and Charybdis. Economic and Political Weekly 43: 37–42.Google Scholar
  39. Reddy, G.M., A.K. Kumar, P.T. Rao, and O. Springate-Baginski. 2011. Issues related to Implementation of the Forest rights Act in Andhra Pradesh. Economic and Political Weekly 46 (18): 73–81.Google Scholar
  40. Ribot, J.C., A. Agarwal, and A. Larson. 2006. Recentralising while decentralising: How national re-appropriate forest resources. World Development 34: 1864–1886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ribot, J.C. 2002. Democratic decentralisation of natural resources. Washington DC: World Resource Institute.Google Scholar
  42. Rights and Resources Initiative. 2015. Potential for recognition of Community forest resource rights under India’s Forest Rights Act: A preliminary assessment. RRI, Vasundhara and Natural Resources Management Consultants.Google Scholar
  43. Sahu, G., T. Dash, and S. Dubey. 2017. Political economy of community forest rights. Economic and Political Weekly 52: 44–47.Google Scholar
  44. Sarin, M. 2016. Retrieving Ancestral rights: The making of the forest rights act. In First citizens: Studies on Adivashis, tribals and indigenous peoples of India. M. Radhakrishna (ed.), New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sarin, M., and Springate-Baginski (2010) India’s Forest Rights Act: The anatomy of a necessary but not sufficient institutional reform, IPPG Discussion papers, No 45.Google Scholar
  46. Sarin, M., N. Singh, N. Sundar, and R. Bhogal. 2003. Devolution as a threat to democratic decision making in forestry ?Findings from three States of India. London: Overseas Development Institute.Google Scholar
  47. Sathyapalan, J. 2010. Implementation of the forest rights act in the western ghats region of Kerala. Economic and Political Weekly 45 (30): 65–72.Google Scholar
  48. Satpathy, B. 2017. Forest rights act implementation in Odisha: Redressing historical injustices. South Asia Research 37 (3): 259–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Springate-Baginski, O., and P.M. Blaikie (eds.). 2007. Forests, people and power: The political ecology of reform in South Asia. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  50. Sundar, N. 2011. The rule of law and the rule of property: Law struggle and the liberal state of India. In The state of India after liberalisation: Interdisciplinary perspective, ed. A. Gupta and K. Sivaramakrishnan. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Tatpati, M. (ed.). 2015. Citizen’s report 2015: Community forest rights under the Forest Rights Act. Kaplavriksh and Vasundhara: Pune & Bhubeneswar.Google Scholar
  52. Thakur, P. 2007. After IRS, now forest service questions elite status of IAS, The Times of India. April 27. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2007-04-20/india/278747571ias-officers-indian-forest-service-ifs-officers.
  53. TTF. 2005. Joining the dots, the report of the tiger task force. Government of India: Ministry of Environment & Forests.Google Scholar
  54. Vasan, S. 2016. Shifting the Terrain of struggle: Critically evaluating the Forest Rights Act. In First citizens: Studies on adivasis, tribals and indigenous peoples in India, ed. M. Radhakrishna. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of AnthropologyInstitute of Development Studies KolkataKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations