Scheduled Tribes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill: A View from Anthropology and Call for Dialogue Author(s): Arnab Sen and Esther Lalhrietpui Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 41, No. 39 (Sep. 30 - Oct. 6, 2006), pp. 4205-4210 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4418763 Accessed: 07-01-2016 09:30 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic and Political Weekly. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 203.199.211.197 on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 09:30:28 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Scheduled Tribes (Recognitionof Forest Rights) Bill A View from Anthropologyand Call for Dialogue The value of forests in the lives of local communitieshas been widely discussed in academic literature, yet forest use is a domain of contestation. The new Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill needs to be contextualised in the ground reality of conflicting interests and claims. First, the category of scheduled tribes is contested in social science discourse. Second, forest and tribal policy in India is not adequatelysensitive to value systems of local communitiesand this creates considerable contestation between administrationand the local people. This paper revisits these contestations in the worldwide body of academic discourse. There has been fair consensus in the literature that value systems and customary institutions of local communities have well-developed mechanisms that regulate sustainable lifeways and conserve local ecosystems, though unquestioning acceptance of these may also lead to errors. What is required is for policy to effectively deliver benefits to people and conserve biological diversity, and it is anthropologists who can mediate a dialogic space between the people, their civil society institutions, networks of advocacy, public and local intellectuals, the academia, policy and governance. ARNABSEN, ESTHERLALHRIETPUI ocal communities have been geographically, ecologically Most forest dependent local communities in India are either and culturally linked to forest habitats, particularly in marginal settled cultivators or shifting cultivators who supple- tropical regions of the world. In India, there are several ment their nutritional sources with some hunting and gathering. local communities who depend on forest for primary or supple- A few communities depend almost exclusively on hunting and mentary nutrition, ethnomedical practices, energy and various gathering. Large tracts of forest are essential to their survival other life supporting needs. Their view of nature is based on trust strategies. Madhav Gadgil and RamachandraGuha (1992) posit ratherthan domination, a perception which Tim Ingold (2000) that shifting cultivation and hunting-gathering "with their low posits as common among hunter-gatherers. Communities have population densities, low per capita resource demands, cycles been affected by restrictions to forest access under protection of materials closed on limited spatial scales, and a number of laws. Most often these laws draw their validation from a western practices that promote sustainable resource use" usually have perception of nature very unlike the reciprocal relationship minimal ecological impact. perceived by these communities. Animals like hares, wild boars and some monitor lizards can The new Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest Rights) be hunted, and various edible mushrooms and leaves gathered Bill needs to be contextualised in the cultural specificities of for their nutritional value. Besides foods, various products from forest dependent peoples, particularly "tribal" peoples, their the forest have been traditionallyused by forest dependentpeoples. indigenous. knowledge (IK) systems and the need to revive a For example, the Birhor and Kharia people in Jharkhand,in areas supportive relationship between local communities and the studied by the first author, collect a certain species of creepers native biodiversity. for its fibre. Numerous ethnomedical studies have revealed that healers in forest dwelling communities extensively use medicinal Cultural Context of Forests herbs; a Birhor healer in Jharkhand personally revealed a rich pharmacopoeia to the first author. Forest dwelling communities The forest is like our mother, depend almost entirely, for their energy needs, from firewood We know how to live by suckling at its breast. collected from the forest. Other collectibles include bamboo for We know the name of shrub and every tree, herb, basket for and so on. The forests have We know its uses. making, grasses brooms, also been valuable for horticulture in areas of Assam If we were made to live in a land without forests, purposes studied the second author. Then all this learning that we have cherished by Over the generations will become useless, In the present parlance of forest management in post-colonial And slowly, we will forget it all (Bawa Mahalia, a Bhil peasant India, most of these traditional products of the forest have been in a letter of protest against forced eviction for the Narmada named non-timberforest produce (NTFP). The implicit dichotomy project). is between what constitutes timber, which can be sold at high Economic and Political Weekly September 30, 2006 4205 This content downloaded from 203.199.211.197 on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 09:30:28 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions prices in the market and is state property, and what is not timber, times led to violent resistance by local communities [cf Guha of less commercial value, and to which local communities can 1999; Saberwal and Rangarajan 2003a]. be allowed access. The latter are now marketed by a state Unfortunately the post-colonial state in India has largely con- supported marketing cooperative named TRIFED. Central India tinued the exclusion of local communities, and the supposed move accounts for the largest share in monetised market for NTFP. towards a more inclusive forest policy is yet to be actualised at Table 1 gives a list of some salient forest collectibles in central the groundlevel. Strictexclusion of people from protectedareas has India and their uses, including traditional uses and commercial often been mediated by a desire to protect species [cf Rangarajan uses in the newly monetised local economies. 2003], but the same policies have allowed the commercial According to Tim Ingold (2000) hunting and gathering com- extraction of timber in other areas. munities see nature as a continuum of which they themselves The 1952 forest policy classified forest into protected forests are a part; for example, some northern hunting communities for ecological balance, national forests for commercial use, village believe that the caribou willingly gives itself up to the hunter forests for community use and tree lands to improve the physical and if the hunter is disrespectful towards the prey he risks being condition of the country. It was in fact retrogressive as the earlier, unsuccessful in future hunts. Perceptions of a reciprocal rela- colonial policies left some space for subsistence use and did not tionshipwith natureare recorded in the manifesto of the Jharkhandis touch the private/CPR (common pool resource) forests. The only Organisation for Human Rights [JOHAR 2001], which says that the tribals of Jharkhandenjoy the bounties of the forest, leaving Table 1: Forest Produce in Central India space and utility for the other animals, and other animals of prey Plant Part Use for the predators; that the tribal allows the forest to grow and Collected regenerate itself. Similar perceptions are expressed by Bawa Sal (Shorea robusta) Seed Food Mahalia, quoted at the beginning of this article, published in Leaf Freshleaves used formaking traditional Voices 2001. cups for eating and drinking.Dried lea- Since hunting and gathering, as well as swiddening have ves are sold to middlemenfor manu- factureinto bowlsand remained ways of life for many forest dependent communities disposableplates, in there is cultural valuation of the forest: cups. India, persistent Mahua(Bassia latifolia) Seed Used to make oil, knownas kachada conservation and sustainable use are part of the norms governing in Jharkhand,traditionally used for the interface between the human and the non-human. lightinglamps. Also, cooked and eaten. Sacred groves, typical to Indian tradition, known by various Flower Used to distil liquorknown by various local names such as kadu local or regional names have been interpreted as an ancient irpi among the Kondh,and paurauamong the strategy for sustainable use of the forest. Sacred groves are Santhal. central to local belief systems and practices in many different Fruit Eaten raw or cooked. parts of India. Social scientists and ecologists have reported Amla(Pysilianthrius embelica) Fruit Medicinaluse conservation practices centred on sacred groves, such as in the Harra(Terminalia chabula) Fruit Medicinaluse Western Ghats and the Khasi Hills. Studies in Bahera(Terminalia