Determining the Barriers to and Opportunities for Community Involvement in the Management of the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Uttarakhand, India
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2016 Determining the barriers to and opportunities for community involvement in the management of the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Uttarakhand, India Trisha Singh Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Part of the Biodiversity Commons, and the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Singh, Trisha, "Determining the barriers to and opportunities for community involvement in the management of the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Uttarakhand, India" (2016). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 4574. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/4574 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DETERMINING THE BARRIERS TO AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN MANAGEMENT OF THE NANDA DEVI BIOSPHERE RESERVE, UTTARAKHAND, INDIA By TRISHA SINGH B.S. Wildlife Ecology, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, 2009 Thesis Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Resource Conservation, Option (International Conservation and Development) The University of Montana Missoula, MT May 2014 Approved by: Sandy Ross, Dean of The Graduate School Keith Bosak, Chair Department of Society and Conservation Stephen F. Siebert, Committee Member Department of Forest Management Matthew McKinney, Committee Member Center for Natural Resources and Environmental Policy © COPYRIGHT by Trisha Singh 2014 All Rights Reserved ii Singh, Trisha, M.Sc., Spring 2014 Resource Conservation Determining the barriers to and opportunities for community involvement in the management of the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Uttarakhand, India. Chairperson: Dr. Keith Bosak ABSTRACT Today’s global political environment places a high value on social equality and economic well- being. In this climate, emphasizing biodiversity conservation over socio-economic development through exclusionary methods of habitat protection has become ethically questioned and politically dangerous. The goal of this research was to understand the barriers and opportunities for local involvement in the management of the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve in Uttarakhand, India. We attempted to understand the feasibility of local community involvement in the management of the NDBR from the perspective of policy-making organizations and that of the local communities. Key findings highlight barriers to community participation at all the stakeholder group levels. We argue that these barriers are introduced first due to the dated and rigid institution and structure within which participation practices are initiated. These barriers present themselves as: the conflicting missions and goals among stakeholders across the various scales; differences in the amount of decision-making power possessed and desired by the various scales; inflexible policies and procedures; and constrained human and monetary resources. Over time these berries have led to perceptual and attitudinal barriers at all scales that hinder the potential for successful participatory procedures for the future. These barriers arise from the incorrect perceptions of community composition and a superficial understanding of their complex structure; from over looking historical livelihood strategies when determining participation programs; and finally from the incomplete conceptualization of management organizations by communities. Ultimately these barriers have led to stereotypical “us versus them” polarizations. Overlooking inter-scalar heterogeneity and community complexities before the development and implementation of participatory programs can lead to unintended and long lasting barriers to the community engagement process. There is an urgent need to review the success of participatory procedures and to refine their process. Findings suggest a need to shift away from the impact reduction focus of income generation activities. A greater variety of opportunities that better incorporate needs of the community, such as skill based youth training or links to sustainable markets for local products, are needed. Ultimately, greater flexibility at the state level of the forest department and decision-making authority at the community level could provide for more innovative problem solving. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the help and support of so many at the University of Montana. First and foremost, I would like to express my very sincere gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Keith Bosak. His advice, guidance and patience were absolutely crucial to my navigation of this unchartered territory of society and conservation. Valuable inputs for my committee members, Dr. Stephen F. Siebert and Dr. Matthew McKinney challenged me to broaden my horizons and made my research that much more exciting. I am also tremendously thankful for the funding and experience provided by the School of Forestry and Conservation through four semesters of teaching-assistantship positions. Grants provided by the US Forest Service and Soroptimist International of Missoula made data collection and analysis possible. I would also like to extend my heartfelt thanks to all the participants of this research from UNESCO, the Uttrakhand Forest Department and the villages of Lata and Tolma. I am indebted to all those who helped me gain access to interviewees and to my study sites. iv Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... III LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... VIII LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ VIII LIST OF ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................... IX CHAPTER ONE: INTROCUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 1.1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 CONTEXT OF RESEARCH PROBLEM .......................................................................................... 4 1.3 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................... 6 1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................ 7 1.5 SOCIO-POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE NDBR ............................................................................. 7 1.6 STRUCTURE OF THESIS .......................................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER TWO: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW ..... 13 2.1 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................. 13 2.2. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 16 2.2.1 Need for new conservation methods ........................................................................ 16 2.2.2 Shifting trends towards community involvement ..................................................... 17 2.2.3 Conceptualizing communities ................................................................................. 20 2.2.4 Costs and benefits of community based conservation initiatives ............................. 21 2.2.4 Barriers to success of community based conservation initiatives ............................ 25 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 28 3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................................................................... 28 3.1.1 Basic methodology and justification ........................................................................ 28 3.1.2 Stakeholder group selection ..................................................................................... 29 3.1.3 Site selection within stakeholder group ................................................................... 31 3.2 SAMPLING DESIGN ............................................................................................................... 32 3.2.1 Individual and group interviews ............................................................................... 32 3.2.2 Sampling technique ................................................................................................. 33 3.3 DATA ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 35 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS FROM LOCAL COMMUNITY .......................................... 37 4.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 37 4.1.1 Characteristics of respondents .................................................................................