Joint forest management in India: Experiences of two decades

Abstract

Joint Forest Management (JFM), embracing the philosophy of forest conservation and livelihood improvement through cooperation between state and civil society, has emerged over the past decades both as a specific paradigm of forest governance in India and as India's largest community forestry program. The JFM program, evolved during early 1970s covering a few forest villages as a model for reversing the trend of degraded forest ecosystem through the active protection by local villagers. The JFM program is implemented currently by 106,482 Joint Forest Management Committees (JFMC) and it covers 22 million ha of forests spread across 28 constituent states of India and union territories. JFM emerged against a backdrop of two centuries of centralised bureaucratic control over forest management in India. Centralized control during the 19th and 20th centuries failed either to conserve resources or to contribute substantially to the well-being of local populations. However, inconsistent persuasions from decentralization policies in India under present forest policy (1988) have prompted people to analyse the theoretical basis for accepting that decentralization would bring improvements in forest ecosystem management. Still others have contested the de facto rationale for decentralization (i.e., improved forest management) and have suggested that decentralization may be a manipulation by elites to serve their own interests or to shift power, for example from national to international agencies that have funded decentralization. Thirty years from its inception, there are now concerns for the recent effectiveness of JFM (over the past 20 years) because it is a group action that is getting old and is perhaps losing some of its pioneering drive and innovativeness. Although JFM has been administered nationally, decisions on implementation detail have been left to the individual states, resulting in different strategies. The long history of JFM has also provided scope for experiences with it to change over time as well as between places. Given the range of experiences with and perceptions of JFM, as well as the importance of the objectives JFM ostensibly serves, the time is ripe therefore for a retrospective evaluation to take stock of its actual achievements, its status and ways forward. The current paper seeks to provide such a review and analysis. The paper highlights design and implementation issues related to government resolutions, benefits-sharing and forest offences. It also assesses the critical design factors and key drivers responsible for institutional reforms. The paper evaluates impacts of protection on forest productivity and on the livelihoods of local communities. It highlights that the JFM program, by virtue of the diversity of its implementation, provides an ideal laboratory for exploring why similar reforms can lead to different outcomes. The paper argued that though there are supporting government policy and guideline and massive fund support, why there has been a low down of enthusiasm for JFM in the last two decades. From experiences, it suggests strategies for its revival and JFM can further contribute effective toward forest conservation and enhanced livelihood opportunities in the future.