Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Aligning conservation efforts with resource use around protected areas

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Ambio Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A large number of economically disadvantaged people live around protected areas. Conservation efforts that focus on poverty alleviation, work on the premise that an increase in household wealth decreases use of forest resources. We surveyed 1222 households across four tiger reserves to test the paradigm that an increase in assets leads to reduced forest use and we also assess the effects of other socio-economic factors. We find that increase in assets may reduce Non-timber Forest Product (NTFP) collection, but may not necessarily reduce livestock numbers or use of wood as a cooking fuel. Households that faced more economic setbacks were more likely to state that they wanted more livestock in the future. Education is positively associated with choosing Liquefied Petroleum Gas as a cooking fuel in the future. We find site and resource-specific variation. Fifty percent of all households (range across sites: 6–98) want to collect NTFP while 91% (range: 87–96) want to retain or own more livestock over the next 5–10 years. Understanding current and future resource use will help plan context-specific conservation efforts that are better aligned with reducing specific pressures around protected areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agarwala, M., R.S. DeFries, Q. Qureshi, and Y.V. Jhala. 2016. Changes in the dry tropical forests in Central India with human use. Regional Environmental Change 16: 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, I., B. Robson, M. Connolly, F. Al-Yaman, E. Bjertness, A. King, M. Tynan, R. Madden, et al. 2016. Indigenous and tribal peoples’ health (The Lancet–Lowitja Institute Global Collaboration): A population study. The Lancet 388: 131–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angelsen, A., P. Jagger, R. Babigumira, B. Belcher, N.J. Hogarth, S. Bauch, J.B.C. Smith-Hall, and S. Wunder. 2014. Environmental income and rural livelihoods: A global-comparative analysis. World Development 64: 12–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, C.B., T. Reardon, and P. Webb. 2001. Nonfarm income diversification and household livelihood strategies in rural Africa: Concepts, dynamics, and policy implications. Food Policy 26: 315–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belcher, B., R. Achdiawan, and S. Dewi. 2015. Forest-based livelihoods strategies conditioned by market remoteness and forest proximity in Jharkhand, India. World Development 66: 269–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, N.J., 2016. Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology 30: 582–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broxton, P.D., X. Zeng, D. Sulla-Menashe, and P.A. Troch. 2014. A global land cover climatology using MODIS data. Journal of Applied Meteorology Climatology 53: 1593–1605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Census of India. 2011. District Census handbook. The Registrar General & Census Commissioner, New Delhi. Retrieved March 1st, 2018, from https://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/dchb/DCHB.html.

  • Davidar, P., M. Arjunan, and J.P. Puyravaud. 2008. Why do local households harvest forest products? A case study from the southern Western Ghats, India. Biological Conservation 141: 1876–1884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forest Survey of India. 2011. Socio-economic contribution of forests: Production & consumption of forest resources in India. Pages 67–79 in India State of Forest Report. New Delhi, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India.

  • Gubbi, S., M. Linkie, and N. Leader-Williams. 2008. Evaluating the legacy of an integrated conservation and development project around a tiger reserve in India. Environmental Conservation 35: 331–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irengbam, M., P. Dobriyal, S.A. Hussain, and R. Badola. 2017. Balancing conservation and development in Nandhaur Wildlife Sanctuary, Uttarakhand, India. Current Science 112: 1187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaaya, E., and M. Chapman. 2017. Micro-credit and community wildlife management: Complementary strategies to improve conservation outcomes in Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Environmental Management 60: 464–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J., Z. Ouyang, and H. Miao. 2010. Environmental attitudes of stakeholders and their perceptions regarding protected area-community conflicts: A case study in China. Journal of Environmental Management 91: 2254–2262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livestock Census of India. 2012. 19th Livestock Census. Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries. Retrieved March 1st, 2018, from https://data.gov.in/catalog/livestock-and-poultry-livestock-census.

  • Macura, B., L. Secco, E. Pisani, A.S. Pullin, and V. Reyes-García. 2016. All that glitters is not gold: The effect of top-down participation on conservation knowledge, attitudes and institutional trust in a Central Indian tiger reserve. Regional Environmental Change 16: 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madegowda, C., and C.U. Rao. 2013. The ban of Non-Timber Forest Products collection effect on Soligas migration in Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple Wildlife Sanctuary, India. Antrocom 9: 105–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maity, B. 2017. Comparing health outcomes across Scheduled Tribes and Castes in India. World Development 96: 163–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mascia, M.B., S. Pailler, M.L. Thieme, A. Rowe, M.C. Bottrill, F. Danielsen, J. Geldmann, R. Naidoo, A.S. Pullin, and N.D. Burgess. 2014. Commonalities and complementarities among approaches to conservation monitoring and evaluation. Biological Conservation 169: 258–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McShane, T.O., P.D. Hirsh, T.C. Trung, A.N. Songorwar, A. Kinzig, B. Monteferri, D. Mutekanga, and H.V. Thanh. 2011. Hard choices: Making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biological Conservation 144: 966–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nayak, B.P., P. Kohli, and J.V. Sharma. 2012. Livelihood of local communities and forest degra dation in India: Issues for REDD+. New Delhi: The Energy and Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry, L., J. Barlow, and H. Pereira. 2014. Wildlife harvest and consumption in Amazonia’s urbanized wilderness. Conservation Letters 7: 565–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patnaik, U., and P.K. Das. 2017. Do development interventions confer adaptive capacity? Insights from rural India. World Development 97: 298–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. 2017. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/.

  • Salafsky, N. 2011. Integrating development with conservation: A means to a conservation end, or a mean end to conservation? Biological Conservation 144: 973–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Setty, R.S., K. Bawa, T. Ticktin, and C. Gowda. 2008. Evaluation of a participatory resource monitoring system for nontimber forest products: The case of amla (Phyllanthus spp.) fruit harvest by Soligas in South India. Ecology and Society 13: 19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackleton, C.M., and A.K. Pandey. 2014. Positioning non-timber forest products on the devel opment agenda. Forest Policy and Economics 38: 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shome, S. 2014. Inclusive rural development through green jobs: The NREGA example. Productivity 3: 266–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, M.P., P.P. Bhojvaid, W. de Jong, J. Ashraf, and S.R. Reddy. 2017. Forest transition and socio-economic development in India and their implications for forest transition theory. Forest Policy and Economics 76: 65–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tatpati, M., and N. Pathak-Broome. 2016. Emerging paradigms under the Forest Rights Act. In Land rights in India: Policies, movements and challenges, ed. V. Bhagat-Ganguly, 195–211. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma, M., D. Negandhi, C. Khanna, A. Edgaonkar, A. David, G. Kadekodi, R. Costanza, G. Kadekodi, and R. Singh. 2015. Economic valuation of tiger reserves in India: A VALUE+ approach. Bhopal: Indian Institute of Forest Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J.H., N.A.O. Hill, D. Roe, J.M. Rowcliffe, N.F. Kümpel, M. Day, F. Booker, and E.J. Milner-Gulland. 2016. Reframing the concept of alternative livelihoods. Conservation Biology 30: 7–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the various respondents living in and around these forests for their valuable time, sharing their lives and providing their invaluable insights to this study. A team of people on the ground have made this study possible. We thank Arpit Deshmukh, Neyi Jamoh, Prachi Kardam, Tanya Seshadri, Santosh Sogal, Jaishree Subrahmaniam for their inputs in planning, implementation, data collection, entry and management. We thank the Zilla Budakkatu Abhivrudhhi Girijana Sangha and its taluk counterparts, village leaders, mukhyas, gaon burrahs, Tana Tapi, Sanjay Shukla, Rakesh Shukla, Neha and Amit Verma, Kime Rambia, and other forest department staff and officers for their insights. We thank Benjamin Clark, Meghna Agarwala, Prashanth N.S., Rita Banerji, Imrana Khan, Abishek Harihar, Pooja Choksi, Anand MO for their support. We thank Madevi, Shivamma, Periswamy, Mahadevaiah, Shivamallu, Pandegowda, Yamuna Markam, Mahendra Bisen, Raju Khan, Sikander Khan, Kepu Riba, Masem Tachang, Pahi Tachang, Pema Tacho, Sarsomi Degio, Mize Degio, P. Gola, S. Gola, Surendra Pal, Dr. Sharma, Gabbar Singh Negi, Kaala and numerous others for their invaluable help in the field, interest, friendship, opening up their houses and ironing out difficulties in field. NV dedicates this paper to her team-mate Neyi Jamoh and the group that rallied around us to beat the odds.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Earth Institute Fellow & Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, Schermerhorn Extension, 10th Floor, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Nandini Velho

  2. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Ruth S. DeFries

  3. Barnard College & Center for Development Economics and Policy, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Anja Tolonen

  4. Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy, Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs, 405 A Robertson Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, 08544, USA

    Umesh Srinivasan

  5. Shukan Sky Apartments, Kudasan, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, 382421, India

    Aditi Patil

Authors
  1. Nandini Velho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruth S. DeFries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anja Tolonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Umesh Srinivasan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aditi Patil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nandini Velho.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 94 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Velho, N., DeFries, R.S., Tolonen, A. et al. Aligning conservation efforts with resource use around protected areas. Ambio 48, 160–171 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1064-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1064-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation