Master´s Thesis, 60 credits Ecosystems, Governance and Globalization Master´s programme 2009/11, 120 credits
Trees, Temples and Technology
Social values and ecosystem services in a changing urban context, the case of Bangalore
Maria Schewenius
Trees, Temples and Technology
− Social values and ecosystem services in a changing urban context, the case of Bangalore
Maria Schewenius
Master’s thesis
Stockholm Resilience Centre/ Stockholm University June 2011
2
3 Acknowledgements
This study would not have been possible without the support of my supervisor, Maria Tengö, who not only enabled the field study but through encouragement, support and constructive criticism throughout the project managed to make every step of the process an inspiring learning opportunity.
A hu ge thank you to Derick, who proved to be just the person one wants to work with in the field. This study would not have been the same without you. Thank you also to Nirmala for always being there and for opening your home to me. Sinchana and Inchara, thank you for patient field work assistance. Maybe one day I get to do the same for you.
Also thank you to the people at ATREE, some of whom have been involved in this project from the very beginning.
Lastly I want to thank all the participants, who took precious time off other duties to guide me around, or to answer questions about a topic that for some probably were low on their personal interest agenda. The majority of the respondents will most likely not be reached by this paper, the final result of their participation. I can only say that I hope that the study will somehow contribute to a positive outcome and that, in the best of worlds, they themselves will take part of it.
“Du är bjuden på maskerad hos dig själv. Du är den enda som är bjuden och kommer att delta. Maskeraden är obligatorisk. Vägrar du delta så innebär det att du ställer dig utanför gruppen.” - Ellen Lamm
4 Abstract
The pressure on natural resources in urban areas increases as cities grow in size and populations; however, informal institutions as norms and values by ‘common people’ can play a major role for protection of urban greens. As the city of Bangalore, India, rapidly grows in size and population, its green areas are disappearing. In rural parts of India, local people’s notion of certain ecosystems as sacred has rendered the ecosystems protection and contributed to sustenance of ecosystem services’ generation. The aim of this paper is to explore the potential of stewardship of urban greens in a changing social context, focusing on religious beliefs and practices surrounding trees in Bangalore. It focuses on the cultural dimension of ecosystem services and connects previous research on sacred groves in rural areas with research on stewardship of urban greens. Methods include interview surveys with visitors to five focus sites of religious significance representing the city's four major religions; semi-structured interviews with key informants; and observations. Results show that on the Hindu sites -the study’s main focus- in the city, a range of trees were sacred themselves and revered through a set of practices. On the other sites, trees were rather an incorporated part of the land areas with religious significance. On all sites a set of cultural services was appreciated as generated by trees. Furthermore, visitors had a strong stake in the trees but the experienced levels of capacity to secure the trees’ protection differed between the sites. The study concludes that ‘common people’ are crucial stakeholders for ecosystem stewardship that ensures protection of the urban greens in Bangalore. The different religions in the city provide a multi-faceted protection of different types of urban greens. The level of protection is the outcome of a complex web of community values and norms, where sacredness is one included element.
Key words: Sacred trees, cultural ecosystem services, Bangalore, social-ecological memory, ecosystem stewardship
5
Table of contents
1. Introduction ...... 8 2. Background ...... 10 2.1. Urban greens and social-ecological memory ...... 11 2.2. Urban trees and ecosystem services in human-dominated ecosystems ...... 13 2.3. Sacred trees ...... 15 2.3.1. The mythology ...... 15 2.3.2. The wishing tree ...... 17 2.3.3. Navagraha gardens ...... 18 3. Case study description ...... 19 4. Methods ...... 22 4.1. Qualitative and quantitative methods ...... 22 4.1.1. Triangulation ...... 24 4.2. The fieldwork ...... 25 4.2.1. Research sites ...... 26 4.2.2. Interview types and respondents ...... 29 4.2.3. Structured interviews ...... 30 4.2.4. Semi-structured interviews ...... 31 4.2.5. Own observations and data gathering ...... 32 5. Results ...... 33 5.1. Sacred trees in a changing social context ...... 33 5.1.1. Tree worshipping at the Hindu sites ...... 36 5.1.2. Other culturally significant trees for Hindus: Gundu topos and heritage trees . 37 5.1.3. Meanings and values of trees on the Buddhist, Muslim and Christian sites ..... 39 5.1.4. Specific reasons for visitors to come to the focus sites ...... 40 5.2. Generated and appreciated ecosystem services ...... 41 5.2.1. Activities and the trees’ role during the visits ...... 42 5.3. The social and religious context for stewardship of sacred trees ...... 47 5.3.1. Religious governance structures ...... 48 5.3.2. The perceived importance of trees and respondents’ preparedness to act ...... 50 5.3.3. The dynamics of the Hindu sacred sites and related conservation potential ..... 51 6. Discussion ...... 53 6.1. Beliefs and practices as tree stewardship in Bangalore ...... 54 6.1.1. The social-ecological memory as a dynamic system ...... 54 6.1.2. The social structures and the design of ecosystem stewardship ...... 56 6.2. Challenges and potentials for supporting ecosystem services in an urban context .... 58 7. Conclusions ...... 61 8. References ...... 62 9. Appendices ...... 67 Appendix 1. Appreciated ecosystem services as generated by trees ...... 67 Table 1: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Hindu focus sites ...... 67 Table 2: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Buddhist focus site ...... 68 Table 3: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Muslim focus site ...... 69 Table 4: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Christian focus site ...... 70
6 Appendix 2. Transect result: religious sites, location and trees ...... 71 Appendix 3. Respondents other than survey participants ...... 73 Table 1: Key informants ...... 73 Table 2: Informants (other) ...... 75 Table 3: Observation sites other than the focus- and transect sites ...... 75 Appendix 4. Species, symbolism, value and areas of use of sacred trees ...... 78 Table 1: Historical tree symbolism ...... 78 Table 2: Navagraha trees, shrubs and grasses ...... 79 Table 3: The meanings of the Navagraha tree species ...... 81 Table 4: Nakshatra Vanas, Star trees ...... 82 Table 5: Sacred trees, other ...... 85 Appendix 5. Governance structures ...... 89 Table 1: Official political governance structure ...... 89 Table 2: Example of religious governance structure ...... 90 Appendix 6. Surveys and responses to survey questions with pre-stated alternatives ...... 91 Table 1: Survey questionnaire ...... 91 Table 2: Responses to questions with pre-stated alternatives ...... 94
7 1. Introduction
Every individual of the human species depend on essential ecosystem services and the capacity of ecosystems to generate the services (Elmqvist et al. 2010; MA 2005). Cities are human-dominated landscapes where the urban population increase puts pressure on the cities' resources, such as land, water, vegetation, human resources, infrastructure, electricity, finances and transport (EMPRI 2008). At the same time, cities play an increasingly important role as the arenas for delivery of public services, as well as to address ecosystem health issues, where the provision of ecosystem services plays a key role for the support of both (RF Young 2010). This dual role is of especially pressing importance in Asia and Africa as by 2030, the two continents both have higher numbers of urban dwellers than any other major area of the world (UN-HABITAT 2008; UN-HABITAT 2006).
Many urban ecosystem services are dependent on the existence of urban green spaces such as parks, large trees and allotment gardens. The green areas’ functions are determined by their sizes; their proximity to each other; the species that they contain or support; and the composition of individuals within the species regarding for example sex and age. A mix of interconnected urban greens as a part of the urban landscape can thereby support the foundation for urban ecological resilience, as biodiversity-rich ecosystems able to function despite disturbances such as for example heat waves or flooding (Elmqvist et al. 2003; Folke 2010).
Informal management impact on the presence and productivity of urban ecosystems, as research in for example Stockholm, Sweden, show (Andersson, Barthel, and Ahrne 2007). At the same time, numerous case studies from India and elsewhere show that the perception of certain species or ecosystems as sacred, which is tradition amongst many local communities, has contributed to conservation of biodiversity and generation of ecosystem services (Colding and Folke 2001; Bhagwat and Rutte 2006; Gadgil and Vartak 1976). India can be regarded as one of the success stories of globalization, with a success defined by high and sustained rates of growth of aggregate and per capita national income; and a substantial reduction in income poverty. India is becoming the 'office' of the world because of its ability to take advantage of IT-enabled services off-shoring (p. 1, Ghosh 2010). The rapid economic development together with the population increase has also started an ongoing process of rapid changes in land use in large metropolitan areas, which has brought up a conflict between infrastructural requirements, as buildings and roads, and conservation of urban green spaces (Zérah 2007).
8
The aim of this paper is to analyze the connection between people's religious beliefs and tree conservation in a rapidly changing social context, using Bangalore, the IT-hub of Southeast Asia, as the example. How can belief systems and practice strengthen the stewardship of urban greens in Bangalore? More specifically, the following questions will be addressed: What are the values and meanings attached to trees? What ecosystem services that trees generate are valuated and by whom? What is the social and religious context for stewardship of sacred- and other culturally significant trees?
The following chapter, chapter 2, builds on literature studies and provides the background for the study. It explores the connections between sacred trees or sacred sites; urban greens; social- ecological memory; and ecosystem stewardship. Chapter three describes the case study and chapter four the methods. The results of the field work are presented in chapter five. Chapter six is a discussion of the results from the field work through a social-ecological memory perspective, and the potential for urban ecosystem stewardship is analyzed. Chapter seven concludes the paper.
9 2. Background
Human societies participate as dynamics of the biosphere and are embedded in its processes (Folke, Chapin, and Olsson 2009). All people are dependent on the ability of ecosystems to generate essential ecosystem services but at the same time individuals as well as human societies at large affect the prerequisites for ecosystem services generation. People and ecosystems are thus intertwined and mutually affecting and re-affecting social-ecological systems (Elmqvist et al. 2010; MA 2005). These systems continuously go through changes, which can happen rapidly and on a large scale. The effects of changes or disturbances to the systems are determined by the systems’ resilience, which can be described as the capacity of a social–ecological system to absorb a spectrum of shocks or perturbations and to sustain and develop its fundamental function, structure, identity and feedbacks as a result of recovery or reorganization in a new context (Folke 2006; Holling 1973). A sustainable development would be the ultimate outcome of a process towards a desirable resilient social-ecological system. Through such development, human needs can be met and sustained with a use of natural resources that does not discriminate any group of people and allows resources to remain to coming generations (WCED 1987). Current management of natural resources is commonly based either on so called steady-state management, which includes calculations of maximum- or optimum sustainable yield and making production of single resources increasingly efficient; or on ecosystem management, which aims at sustaining multiple ecosystem services but uses historic and invalid conditions as reference points. However, over-exploitation and ecosystem productivity that is not being sustained remain as problems (Chapin et al. 2010). It has been argued that stewardship, rather than management, should be in focus. Ecosystem stewardship builds on the acknowledgement that human societies and social processes are interlinked with ecosystems, both as drivers but also equally as receivers of change. The goal is to provide a perspective for society to manage challenges by embracing uncertainty and change, and thereby support human well-being. By building on human norms, values and definitions of well- being, which are all under constant change and partly in relation to ecosystem dynamics, ecosystem stewardship becomes an ever-evolving process that emphasizes the social processes in the navigation towards resilience (Chapin et al. 2010). Ecosystem stewardship implies that rather than continuing the traditional top-down structure of management of natural resources, resilient management of systems may benefit from being nested
10 across scales and actors and build on the inclusion of different sources of knowledge, such as local ecological knowledge by people who live close to natural resources and benefit form their services (Folke 2004; Olsson et al. 2006).
Since urban landscapes will constitute the environment for the majority of the urban population in the future, understanding the ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces, or urban greens, and the institutional management frameworks is crucial for future human well-being (Borgström et al. 2006). Research has further found that the presence of urban greens is a prerequisite for sustainable ecosystem management as people who do not experience nature early and regularly become mentally separated from nature, loose an understanding of the interdependence between people and nature, and are less likely to motivate or become involved in stewardship of ecosystem services (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010). In cities, urban greens community managed green areas are thus important for social-ecological resilience and for a process towards sustainability of social-ecological systems. This paper connects research on management of urban green areas with research on sacred trees and ecosystems.
2.1. Urban greens and social-ecological memory
Urban green spaces, such as cemeteries, allotment gardens and smaller parks, are often not included in formal ecosystem management but their users and their management practices can play a key role in maintaining the sites themselves as well as the services they generate (Andersson, Barthel, and Ahrne 2007; Ernstson 2008; Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010). Findings show that community- managed urban green areas can strengthen the social-ecological systems, as urban greens are sources of ecosystem services that benefit human well-being; and as the people involved share knowledge as well as experiences, which improves management of ecosystem services in the broader urban context (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010; Ernstson 2008).
Urban green areas are closely intertwined with local culture and traditions, as the participation in communities create a shared social memory, manifested in physical objects (such as trees); artefacts (such as tools and booklets); and concepts (such as rules-in-use). The memory can further be supported by external support through media, markets, social networks etc. Memories connected to ecosystems and shared by members of a community that somehow engage in ecosystem management, become social-ecological memories. The practices by members of the communities
11 may be ‘revived and reinvented’ and develop over time, while retaining a core of ‘the same’, gathered under a common social-ecological memory (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010).
In practice, the social-ecological memory can become translated into ecosystem stewardship, which reflects the interaction of the community with the environment where the stewardship is exercised through acts such as for example sacred rituals or gardening. By being emergent and persistent over time, the social-ecological memory may enable management to deal with change and is a critical source of resilience for communities. With the stewards and the social memory carried by them and their communities, a decline of critical ecosystem services may be counteracted (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010). Without green areas, however, and some form of active participation by communities, the social-ecological memory is lost and with that also likely the foundation for stewardship of ecosystem services (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010).
Sacred natural resources as sacred groves in India and elsewhere have been an increasingly popular topic for research in the past decades. It has been concluded that areas with sacred natural groves often hold high biodiversity and that they provide people with important ecosystem services. Such sacred ecosystems, embedded among human settlements, can play a key role for human wellbeing as well as maintain a social-ecological memory for ecosystem management. There is a long tradition in India of holding natural areas sacred by local people (Gadgil and Vartak 1976; Gadgil 1993; Chandrakanth, Bhat, and Accavva 2004). Worshipping of trees and plants as part of religious practice has been documented since the hunting-gathering stage (ca 600 A.D.). The rituals and benefits of tree worship are for example described for example in ritual handbooks in the ancient Sanskrit language. There is no available estimation of temple forests in India but their presence have been reported in eight states across the country (Chandrakanth et al. 1990). It is possible to find extensive literature on sacred groves (areas of varying sizes containing sacred forests) but few to none focus on sacred trees in urban areas. It is concluded in most literature on sacred groves that the local social norms of conduct, amongst those living off- and around the groves, have promoted conservation of the natural resources and promoted biodiversity, which is the foundation for ecosystem services (Gadgil and Vartak 1976; Chandrakanth, Bhat, and Accavva 2004; Bhagwat and Rutte 2006). Conservation by official policies, however, frequently fails due to differences between de jure policies and de facto implementation (Chandrakanth et al. 1990). Suggestions on actions aimed at conservation of sacred groves (Chandrakanth, Bhat, and Accavva 2004), which may be valid in an urban setting as well are: classification of trees as religious property; decentralization of power; and an increased number of trees.
12 2.2. Urban trees and ecosystem services in human-dominated ecosystems
Ecosystem services and the natural capital stocks that produce them are vital for societies to function and for the very survival of life on Earth (Costanza et al. 1997; MA 2005). As the world's population is increasingly urban, it becomes increasingly important to restore, preserve and enhance biodiversity in green areas (Savard, Clergeau, and Mennechez 2000). In cities where urban gardening is part of the urban landscape, it supports ecosystem services such as pollination, seed dispersal and pest regulation. Essential ecosystem services are thus supported by the urban greens locally as well as over larger areas (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010). Urban greens are sources of ecosystem services that benefit human well-being, but society’s heavy mark on the urban nature determines to a large extent the generation of ecosystem services as well as who gets to benefit from them (Ernstson 2008).
Urban trees reduce urban runoff, sewer overloads and resulting water pollution; reduce heat islands through shading and transpirational cooling by tree leaves; provide habitats for birds, insects and other groups of animals; act as green corridor nodes in the urban landscape; purify air; reduce atmospheric pollution in the city by capturing particulate matter, carbon dioxide, ozone and other air pollutants; act as noise filter; and sequester carbon. In hot countries and countries with monsoons, urban trees provide people especially from low to medium income city dwellers with shadow and shelter (McPherson et al. 1997; Borgström et al. 2006; Nagendra and Gopal 2010b). The trees also provide people with cultural services, such as aesthetics or means of maintaining traditions, and contribute to an overall improvement in human well-being and community vitality (Nagendra and Gopal 2010b).
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment report defines cultural ecosystem services (see fig. 1) as “spiritual, intellectual and physical links between human cultures and ecosystems” (p. 120, MA, 2005). Six types of cultural services are provided by ecosystems: cultural diversity; cultural landscapes and heritage values; spiritual services; inspiration (for arts and folklore for example); aesthetics; and recreation and tourism (MA 2005). However, they have a tendency to link into each other.
13 Cultural ecosystem services (MEA, 2005)
Cultural Cultural Spiritual Inspiration Aesthetics Recreation diversity landscapes services (for example and tourism and identity and heritage for arts and value folklore) . Figure 1: The cultural ecosystem services as defined in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2005)
Research on cultural ecosystem services and especially on spiritual and religious services is limited (MA 2005). The findings so far show, however, that spiritual values act as strong incentives for ecosystem conservation in some countries, amongst them India, but the condition of the services depend heavily on policies, interventions and local leadership (MA 2005). The spiritual values often coincide with others such as biodiversity, water supply and biomedicines. Research has furthermore found that people's cultural identity and value systems have developed in close interaction with the natural environment. Today rapid urbanization, a change of family structures, loss of traditional institutions, increased transportation and a growing globalization of the social and economic spheres have “significantly weakened the linkages between ecosystems and cultural diversity and cultural identity” (p. 120, MEA 2005). The spiritual benefits that people obtain from ecosystems can be either strengthened or weakened with the loss of particular ecosystem attributes, such as sacred forests, combined with social and economic changes. People in general prefer natural environments over human constructed ones. The MA Synthesis concludes that cultural services may decline in the future because of people's lack of personal experience with nature and lower cultural diversity, but if knowledge systems can increase together with cultural diversity, the cultural services may also increase or remain stabile (MA 2005). It can thus be presumed that research on sacred trees and trees on sacred sites in an urban context can benefit the prevalence and conservation of ecosystem services in cities. This paper makes an important contribution to existing research by exploring religious beliefs and practices connected to sacred trees and trees on sacred sites, from a social-ecological stewardship perspective, using Bangalore as the case study.
14 2.3. Sacred trees
There is a long tradition in India mainly to hold trees sacred which Hindus still do today. The local religious traditions that existed before Hinduism had worshipping of natural objects as an integrated element in the people's devotional practices. When Hinduism was developed, it built on the local religions and many temples that today stand originate from sacred groves (Chandrakanth and Romm 1991). There is today an increase in initiatives for tree-planting programmes by temple organizations, supported by ancient texts which guide to proper ceremonies to accompany the ideological planting of trees (Nugteren 2005).
Tree species belonging to the Ficus family, which are common in India, are amongst the most sacred. Since the Ficus trees have thus been protected, they are an important part of ecosystems in India and are recognized as keystone species (Gadgil 1993; Gadgil and Vartak 1976). Such species are strongly interacting with the surrounding ecosystem and have large top-down effects on species diversity and composition, relative to its biomass dominance within the functional group (Davic 2003). Keystone species have been special targets in efforts to maximize biodiversity protection (Mills, Soule, and Doak 1993). The presence of keystone species is crucial in maintaining the organization and diversity of their ecological communities. Second, it is implicit that these species are exceptional, relative to the rest of the community, in their importance (Mills, Soule, and Doak 1993).
2.3.1. The mythology
Trees fundamentally derive their sacredness from the Hindu mythology but the 'official' status as sacred, worshipped trees may be created either through a natural process or by temple priests proclaiming them sacred by purposeful planting, marriage and consecrating (Nugteren 2005). The more ancient a tree is, the more sacred power it is considered to possess, as the tree has a closer connection to the mythic time and because it has had time to collect devotional expression by its devotees (Nugteren 2005). Tree worshipping in temple areas can change during practice and with time: a sacred tree may exist or have existed; then a shrine is built which takes over the focus of devotion; the shrine develops into a temple and becomes also physically separated from the tree. A sacred garden may be created,
15 containing certain species which may provide items for ritual use in the temple. The item in focus of sacred devotion may thus change with time and site development. Underprivileged groups can conserve sacred trees and resist industrial exploitation and consequent deterioration of their environment (Nugteren 2005).
In Indian mythology, the world that belongs to the gods exists in mythological time which is separate but overlaps with our contemporary (Nugteren 2005);
“In contemporary India, we encounter not only the past and the present, but also the popular, the rural, and the tribal alongside the high Hinduism of the temples and of traditional pilgrimage.” Even though trees decay and die with time, particular trees are considered to have survived and transited into the present, to man-made shrines and temples. These trees form a bridge between the myth-landscape and the present sacred spot. The tree or the site where a tree once were, works as a sacred encloser, a kind of navel or platform, which connects the tree to ancient powers and mythical times (p. 285 ff, Nugteren, A).
Gods' world
Familiar world
Mythical time Present time
Netherworld Figure 2: The cross-symbolism of sacred trees. Adapted from Nugteren, 2005
Trees have a close connection to snakes and sacred trees typically have stone statues depicting snakes close to- or, when there are two trees, between them. In Southern India, serpents are seen as divine beings that live in and around trees, wind through the netherworld like roots and bring both death and fertility. In the Hindu tradition, cyclic rather than linear thinking determines the cycle of existence and so death and birth alike are necessary elements. With their potentially lethal poison, snakes become a symbol of that cycle and the snakes also renew themselves continuously by shedding their skin, like trees do when they shed their leaves (Nugteren 2005).
16 2.3.2. The wishing tree
Several kinds of rituals centred on trees exist but it is the ritual of the wishing tree (Nugteren 2005) that is of interest for this study. Wishing and praying in front of- or to a tree is a common act (Nugteren 2005). Trees become the target for wishes because of tree functions that they provide: its nature as a generous giver of fruits, flowers, honey etc; the intermediary, as the connection between realms; and the accommodating, a tree as host to a deity (Nugteren 2005). Trees are seen both as manifestations of the divine and as channels through which one can come in contact with heavenly bounty. They are believed to be able to directly, by their own nature, grant what is clearly visualized or desired, through their nature as boundless givers. Certain individual trees are also believed to host a residing deity who in turn can fulfil wishes. Certain tree species, like the Banyan, have mythological connections and any individual tree that belongs to the sacred species could become an object for prayers (Nugteren 2005).
Tree worshipping can take on different models, each with different characteristics regarding the geographical location of the tree(s), the role of the tree in the worshipping rituals and the stakeholders involved.
Table 1: Models of tree worshipping. Adapted from Nugteren, 2005 Name Infrastructural Role of tree Key stakeholder, arrangement actions Tree cult, tree Often individual tree or Its shadow protects Worshippers. Pujas, secondary tree on compound of something else sacred, mantras small temple for example a shrine with a statue of a deity. The tree may have gone from centre of attention to an umbrella function Temple authorities Tree in periphery of Sacred, centre of Temple authorities. initiate and implement temple. Often planted priestly tree cult Brahmanical acknowledgement, domesticating but not fully integrating street- and field Hinduism into temple Hinduism
The models of worshipping show that differences in focus and practices exist even within one religion. The figure should be seen as a guide to what practice may look like and not as a mirror of
17 reality. Seeing as how there are different models of tree worshipping, it can be presumed that they constantly evolve and that sacred sites too can evolve over time.
2.3.3. Navagraha gardens
Sacred trees or the remains thereof make a temple site extra powerful for worshippers (Nugteren 2005). Navagraha (nine planets) gardens, or planet forests, can be planted on temple grounds. The name refers to temples with nine specially selected tree-, shrub and grass species that correlate with nine planets, which are believed to control people's destiny both independently and in combination (Chandrakanth et al. 1990). Hindus commonly have their horoscopes written based on their time and place of birth. The presumed positions of the planets at that time determines the configuration of the individual's star group and subsequently which tree an individual should approach and what actions should be taken during the time of worshipping, to achieve desired results.
The trees, normally smaller saplings apart from the Peepal and perhaps Neem, are arranged in specific patterns on the temple grounds. Apart from the mythological connection to planets, the species have other values such as being traditional medicinal plants, able to survive harsh conditions and providers of large areas of shadow. The Navagraha gardens require limited capital and land to create which enables small, local planting (Chandrakanth et al. 1990).
18 3. Case study description
Bangalore has experienced a perhaps unique growth compared to other cities in the world (EMPRI 2008). The city has grown more than ten-fold since 1949. The growth rate was at 38% between 1991 and 2001, following migration mainly from migration of a people within Karnataka state at a considerable rate; people from other states; and to a lesser extent people from other countries (EMPRI 2008; Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007). The population increased from 5.7 millions in 2001 to 7 million in 2007, mainly as a direct result of migration (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007).
The city offers increasingly good livelihood opportunities; affordable quality education; facilities of higher standard for education, research and technology; and it is the location for the High Court of Karnataka as well as for Vidhana Soudha, the centre of the State government. This has resulted in an increase in the number of skilled professionals; doctors, engineers, lawyers IT-professionals, management experts and scientists (EMPRI 2008). Bangalore is an activity- and technical innovation hub, reflected in an increase in numbers of speciality hospitals; IT; biotechnology; manufacturing industries; and multinational companies (EMPRI 2008; Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007).
It is mainly the IT sector that has initiated and sustained the city's development, starting in the late 80's (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007). The development has made Bangalore go from being nicknamed the Garden City to India's Silicon Valley (BBMP 2011). Commercial and educational institutions have developed together with industries like textiles, aviation, space and biotechnology. People's purchasing power has increased which has lead to secondary employment in services and a real estate and land market. The periphery of the city experiences the largest change, as globalization forces puts focus of the city development to the periphery. An IT corridor has developed from the city's southern periphery to the eastern (Pani 2009). Together with the increase of companies and industries, numerous services have also grown, such as malls, multiplexes, restaurants and pubs, which have all contributed to re-shaping Bangalore.
However, migration, urbanization, industrialization and population growth has severe impact on the city’s resources such as land, water, energy and infrastructure, with the local governing bodies facing difficulties in meeting the rising demands (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007; EMPRI 2008). As the city has grown, its public spaces have decreased in number due to the demand
19 for land use. The built-up area was 16% of the total in 2000 and had by 2007 reached 23-24% (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007). Still, the development of infrastructure, communication, transport and affordable housing has been unable to keep pace with the rapid growth of the city (EMPRI 2008). The number of urban poor has increased and the increasing costs for land and living has pushed the urban poor into squatter settlements that lack adequate amenities and services (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007). According to the Bangalore Bruhat Mahanagara Palike (BBMP, Greater Bangalore Municipal Body), 0.22 million households, equal to 1.1 million people, is defined as poor, out of a population of nearly 7 million (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007).
In a report from 2008, forests (as wooded areas covering hectares) in the Bangalore Urban district covered 4,198 out of the total 217,410 hectares, or 1,97% of the geographical area (EMPRI 2008). As Bangalore is growing, the number of trees has significantly declined in accordance to the growing pressure on land access as the city’s inner areas have become crowded and congested (Nagendra and Gopal 2010b). The remaining forests are heavily degraded as “the loss of habitat, flora and fauna due to man-made activities is severe” (EMPRI 2008).
Space is needed in the city for offices, shops and cafés, houses and roads. The decrease in tree cover, together with an increase in vehicular traffic, has led to an increase in air pollutants and in turn an urban heat island effect (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007). Subsequently, local rainfall and temperatures are behaving unpredictably. However, trees in Bangalore are found protected in sacred locations and located in parks, along streets, near waterways, in home gardens, in commercial zones (Nagendra and Gopal 2010b). Most of the city's trees were planted between 1982 and 1987 in a project where 1.5 million trees were planted in the city (Neginhal 2006; Nagendra and Gopal 2010b). Studies done on the biological composition show that biodiversity remains relatively high, with about 40 species of mammals and over 340 species of birds, amongst others, living within a radius of 40 kilometres from the city centre (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007).
The Bangalore metropolitan area consists largely of three concentric zones, which correspond with the previous local authority areas. The first zone, the most central, comprises the city corporation area, covering 226 km2. Zone two, the surrounding zone, includes the eight former neighbouring municipal councils and 111 villages which form the peri-urban areas and are incorporated into the Greater Bangalore City Corporation. A third zone includes villages up to the Bangalore
20 Metropolitan Area. The Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) is the key local governmental structure that represents and is responsible for the city and outlying areas. Bangalore grew substantially in 2006 when the BBMP replaced local bodies –the Bangalore City Corporation, eight neighbouring councils and 111 outlying villages- as the responsible management body (Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007). The governance structure is, however, complex and complicated and the powers of the BBMP are limited (see Appendix 3, Table 1).
21 4. Methods
The study was carried out from September 2010 until June 2011, with fieldwork carried out during November 2010 – January 2011. It is constructed out of the post-positive interpretive approach, which is typical for qualitative research, since it is suitable for research in a context of rapid social change. Reality can, according to the approach, only be approximated and never fully apprehended (p.11, Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). It provides a framework for inductive research strategies, where theories are created in accordance with the findings of the study, rather than theories determining the design of the study and the desired outcomes (Denzin and Lincoln 2005). In line with the guidelines for grounded theory implementation, the researcher was close to the study situation; focus was on meanings and processes; and attention was paid to the social context. This allowed data collection and analysis to take place simultaneously and progressively, by informing and focusing each other (Charmas 2005). It is acknowledged in the paper that 'truths' are created through communication and that each telling of an event reflects one separate perspective (Denzin and Lincoln 2005). The validity of the study is thus dependent on the researcher's control, questioning and theoretical interpretation of the material (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009).
4.1. Qualitative and quantitative methods
The fieldwork builds on qualitative research as an explanatory case study, with the inclusion of quantitative research in the form of exploratory survey-based interviews (as discussed in Yin, 2003). An illustration of the study design can be seen in Figure 3.
22
Methods: Interviews, surveys, observations
Research strategy: grounded theory, case study
Type of research: Qualitative research with the inclusion of quantitative
Interpretive approach: Post-positivism. Reality can never be fully apprehended, only approximated
Figure 3: The construction design of the study
The exploratory case study was chosen as to understand a contemporary situation, over which the researcher had no control, by building on own observations and interviews (Yin 2003). It builds on three kinds of interviews; survey-based, semi-structured and shorter semi-structured. The survey- based interviews underpin the findings in the semi-structured interviews by showing frequencies of interest for the study, such as how often visitors come to the sacred sites, their reasons for coming and their actions on the site, and thereby provide increased information on specific sites in the present situation (Yin 2003). The relationship between the quantitative and qualitative methods can also be described as that the qualitative methods, i.e. the interviews, gave insights in how the social experiences were created and given meaning, whereas the quantitative methods emphasizes the measurement and analysis of causal relationships between variables, not processes (Denzin and Lincoln 2005).
Case studies as research method have been criticized for being non-generalizable, as a difference to experiments. However, the goal with a case study is to “expand and generalize a theory” (p. 10, Yin, 2003) and to “suggest complexibilities for future investigation” (p. 460, Denzin & Lincoln, 2005).
23 This particular study bridges an existing gap between two schools of theories and uses a set of site- specific examples in Bangalore, which shows on the scope of beliefs, practices and governance structures that surround trees in the city. By doing so, the study provides analytical approaches and insights which may be used in developing future research.
4.1.1. Triangulation
Triangulation, the use of multiple methods, materials, perspectives and observers, was used as a form of validation to add rigor, breadth, complexity, richness as well as depth to the study (Denzin and Lincoln 2005). Triangulation builds on the notion that the ‘truth’ is nothing more than individual perceptions of a topic. The method is thus a tool to secure an in-depth understanding of the studied situation since an objective reality can never be captured (Denzin and Lincoln 2005).
Qualitative and quantitative methods as deep interviews and surveys
Literature and A wide variety informants to of stakeholders situate the as respondents findings
Triangulation or ‘crystalli- zation’
Studies done on Questions about several sites same subjects with different posed in characteristics different ways
Figure 4: Triangulation of methods, respondents and implementation in this study
24
As Figure 4 shows, the triangulation included a mix of survey- and semi-structured interviews; a wide variety of stakeholders as respondents (see Appendix 3, Tables 1 and 2); posing questions about the same subject in different ways (see Appendix 6, Table 1); using a number of study sites with different characteristics; and literature and informants to situate the findings. In line with the ethical guidelines to performing interviews (as discussed by Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009), the participants in the study were informed about the researcher's academic background, the general purpose of the study and that they were free to not answer questions if they so would prefer. The survey-respondents, who answered as private people, were informed that their answers would be treated anonymously and with confidentiality. The respondents who answered in the role of professionals were informed that their names would not appear in the paper and that they instead may be referred to by their title or position. The names of the five focus sites have been excluded from the paper and they are instead referred to as for example Hindu site 1, or the Buddhist site.
4.2. The fieldwork
A field study was conducted in Bangalore for three months, during November 2010 until February 2011. In focus for the field research were trees that grow on sacred sites, such as monastery-, mosque-, church- and temple grounds as well as one adjacent burial ground, in Bangalore. In order to gain an initial understanding of the city and of potential research sites, GIS data was collected prior to departure. It was sent from the local organization ATREE in Bangalore, as well as from a Swedish PhD graduate who had done research in Bangalore. The data covered parks in the city and has been used for the Urban Atlas by the GIS team at Stockholm University. The first two weeks in India were spent doing pilot studies that would help constructing the fieldwork (p. 79, Yin). They consisted of visits local contact people, such as representatives from a local trust for environmental research, and the interpreter. Excursions around the city were conducted in order to get to know the city, its surroundings and its different sacred sites. Initial interviews were conducted with key people connected to temples and who belonged to groups that have traditionally been dependent on the green areas in the city for their livelihoods.
25 4.2.1. Research sites
After having gained an understanding of the city, an urban gradient was created in which Bangalore was divided into three parts – central, peri-urban and rural- and used to select research sites. As illustrated by Figure 6, five focus-sites for the study were selected. As the work progressed, ten additional sacred sites with key informants were identified, as were fifteen key informants other than those specifically connected to sacred sites. A city transect was done where a major road was followed from the central city to the rural (see Appendix 2). All sacred sites, as sites with churches, temples, mosques, burial grounds or religious schools, were mapped on a GPS and the basic characteristics of the compounds (if there were trees, the amount and examples of species) were written down. Throughout the field studies, excursions to 80 sacred sites were done to gather data through own observations and interviews with informants (see Appendix 2 and Appendix 3, Tables 1-3). The sites in total are displayed in Figure 5.
Figure 5: The red markings indicate central-, peri-urban and rural Bangalore respectively. The GPS-points mark key informant-, informant- (others), and observation spots.
26 The five focus sites were all located in central Bangalore where the transformation from a lesser developed city with a relatively low population, into a global metropolis has been the most extensive. The additional ten key informant sacred sites and the observation sites were most prominently located in the peri-urban areas, which are in the process of transitioning into urban areas; and in rural areas, which are relatively unaffected yet by development. Some key informant sites were doubtful if they were in the central Bangalore or in the peri-urban areas as the limits were not always evident, but were chosen because they are important for a large number of people and because they were located in underrepresented directions (for the study) of the city. All sites were chosen as to reflect the scope of religions in the city, the people associated with them and the different meanings of the trees that grow on sacred sites.
Figure 6: The circle shows the approximate boundary between central- and peri-urban Bangalore. Within the circle, the five focus sites are displayed: Two Hindu temples (sites 1 and 3); one Buddhist monastery (site 4); one Muslim dargah and graveyard (site 2) and one Christian church (site 5).
The chosen focus-sites included two Hindu temples with Navagraha (nine planets) ‘forests’; a Buddhist monastery with a tree-covered garden which included a Ficus religiosa tree (Peepal); a Sufi dargah (shrine) on a tree-covered Muslim graveyard; and a Christian church with a tree-lined property area (see Table 2).
27 Table 2: An overview of the focus sites Name of Area Trees Location and Religious Visits and visitors’ site on characteristics on site examples of tree leader/key characteristics map/ (est.) species on site people Name in paper Focus site Temple with 16 Nine planet trees Chief priest The days of the week hold 1/ Hindu adjacent other =Navagraha trees (see Priest different meanings, for site 1 temple and Appendix 4, Table 2). (common), example Tuesdays are courtyard. Area A canopy tree, a Temple trust women’s days. The temple up-and-coming coconut palm tree and committee (6 compound is surrounded by a few more grew just members) walls and a gate. It was inside the entrance to open in the morning and in the compound but the evening every day. outside of the entrance Visitors were not observed to the Navagraha to come for other purposes garden. The rest of the than religious compound was concrete covered Focus site Other green areas 50+ Mango, sandalwood, Caretaker of Fridays were special days 2/ Sufi on two sides, Jamun, Ber. Tree- the dargah when people came to pray. dargah, densely populated covered area about and the Also Thursdays and adjacent areas on the other 200*200 metres. The graveyard Sundays had increased Muslim two trees were evenly (Mutawalli) visitor frequencies. On all graveyard spread out over the days some visitors came to area, and shrub and only enjoy the nature and grass covered the walk around the site. ground Children came there to play Focus site Temple with 20+ Navagraha garden, Chief priest The temple was open 3/ Hindu courtyard. Trees, separate Peepal and Priest mornings and evenings. site 2 bushes, snake Neem, Sea Almond, (common) Each day had a special statues, separate Coconut palm trees, Temple meaning. Visitors came for planet statues ornamental bushes and committee worshipping; to engage in flowers (up to 20 leisure activities (a laughing members) club); and to receive blessings for their new vehicles Focus site Monastery with 30+ Peepal centrally The founder The site was open every day 4/ Buddhist adjacent located, pine trees, of the site and visitors could stroll in monastery teaching/prayer Frangipani (‘Temple General the garden or meditate in the with hall, garden and tree’), ornamental secretary community hall. Monks adjacent university (under trees, bushes and lived on-site. Buddhist community construction) flowers in flowerbeds. teachings were held on hall Concrete and stones Sundays and attracted up to covered the rest of the a hundred people, monks as compound well as from the public Focus site Church with large 15+ Silver oak, Frangipani, Parish priest The church was open for 5/ Christian tree-lined Nilgiri, Gulmohar, Assistant masses early mornings, church courtyard, outside Peepal, ornamental parish priest lunch and evenings, with shrine for bushes and flowers. Church extra masses on Sundays. devotion, adjacent Trees framed the committee Visitors came to visit the college compound, the rest (23-24 church and/or an outside was asphalt covered members) shrine. Many people only used the grounds for transit as a school neighboured the church.
28 The focus sites were centrally located and the areas around them were already heavily developed. The Hindu site 1 belongs to a relatively old part of the city where the visitors in general did not belong to the financially strongest groups. The participants in the survey were exclusively Hindus. The trees on the site consisted of a Navagraha garden plus some trees surrounding the temple site entrance, such as coconut palm tree and a canopy tree. Hindu site 2 was located in a part of the city that had more recently been incorporated in the city centre and was bordering a high-end shopping street on one side and family houses on another that had successively appeared during the last thirty years. The site hosted one Hindu temple with a Navagraha garden and a second temple that functioned more as a prayer hall. Visitors to the temple with the Navagraha garden were in focus amongst the respondents but it was observed that many visitors went to the Navagraha garden and both of the temples. The Muslim site had been private property until it was handed over to the WAKF-board (see Appendix 2, Table 3). It was located between busy roads; beyond one were a large green compound and beyond another was a housing area with predominantly Muslim low- to medium income habitants. The area was some 200*200 metres large and had trees evenly spread out across it. There ground was covered by grass, flowers and small bushes. The Buddhist monastery was located near the Hindu temple site 1 but attracted people from a diverse geographical and cultural background. The site contained a garden with trees, ornamental plants and flowers growing free or in pots; a stupa; and a community hall for meditation and teachings. The Christian site was located in the heart of the city centre, just off one of the main roads. The surrounding area contained a mix of schools, housing constructions and shopping venues. The compound contained an old Roman-Catholic church; a small shrine for a saint; and two schools. Trees grew along the borders of the compound and in front of the shrine next to the church.
4.2.2. Interview types and respondents
On the focus sites, representatives from as many stakeholder groups as possible were interviewed. Interviews were done with two types of respondents: key informants, who held top positions in relation to the sacred sites; and informants, as temple visitors which included people who came to pray and maintenance workers. For the structured interviews, surveys for visitors to the focus sites were used. In the semi-structured interviews, a set of mainly open-ended questions were prepared for managers of the five focus-sites and seven additional sites. For other key informants, such as tree experts or politicians, open-ended questions with focus on governance structures were asked.
29 Table 3: The types of interviews, respondent groups and places of interviewing. The types of Focus sites Key informant sites Additional sites study sites Interview Structured Semi-structured key informant Open, non- type interview interviews structured Survey with site Open, non-structured interviews interviews visitors Observations Observation Semi-structured key-informant interviews Respondents Survey Key informants: religious leaders, Observations: City respondents: committee members, managers of transect, excursions Visitors to the governing boards, academics, activists, to peri-urban and sacred sites, 20 on tree experts, employees within and rural sacred sites each site retirees from government bodies on and sacred trees Key informants: city- and state level (BBMP, India Interviews: Workers religious leaders, Forest Service, Karnataka State on sacred sites, site managers, Pollution Board). neighbours, committee Observations: with tree experts to journalists, members sacred sites and man-made forests businessmen
During visits to some sacred sites in the peri-urban and rural parts of the city, informants other than key informants were interviewed using shorter, non-structured interviews. The respondents included people who worked on- or lived near sacred sites other than the focus sites and did not have key positions.
4.2.3. Structured interviews
During three weeks in December, twenty visitors to each of the focus-sites were interviewed in survey-based interviews using structured forms. Own observations of visitors to the sacred sites were used to select respondents, who were approached when they entered or exited the sacred sites. The selection aimed to proportionally include men and women, divided into four age groups from 'child' to 'old age'. The selection was also aimed at including the types of people using the sites; visitors, workers and beggars. The interviews were based on survey-like questions where response alternatives for the majority of questions were on beforehand defined, in order to make it easier to take notes and compare the answers. A few open-ended questions were asked, such as what the respondents thought was the meaning of the trees on the site in question. The mostly pre-defined answers enabled quick noting of the answers. Sometimes the respondents saw the questionnaires,
30 which may have affected their answers either as to facilitate responding or having made them provide answers that they otherwise would not have.
4.2.4. Semi-structured interviews
Key informants on sacred sites, such as temple managers and priests; as well as experts outside, such as academics were interviewed in December and January. They were chosen as to further create an understanding for the role that trees play on the sacred sites and in the city at large. The key respondents were selected by own observations and on some occasions according to suggestion by respondents. Thirty-eight of the total fifty-three key informants were associated with the five focus sites and an additional ten sacred sites. The aim with choosing an additional ten sacred sites was to increase the validity of the findings by comparing them to a larger number of sites, as well as to compare centrally located sites with peri-urban and even rural ones. One or, where possible, two key informants per site were chosen; one religious leader and one member of a temple committee or similar governing body. Fifteen respondents were associated with institutions or roles other than sacred sites. To further explore the network of stakeholder groups connected to sacred sites or sacred trees other key informants, who did not belong to the research sites, were interviewed using open-ended questions. The group included local NGO's; state politicians; and researchers related to the topic or to the focus sites.
One limitation to the key informant interviews was time. The respondents were interviewed on the sacred sites and they thus normally had duties to attend so some interviews were completed in some thirty minutes. Others, where the respondents had little or no time constraints, lasted up to more than two hours. Since the interviews were held in a familiar location the respondents seemed relaxed, however it can have affected their answers too, as to either make the respondents encouraged to talk openly, or to be reluctant to talk about sensitive issues. In some places it was difficult to find respondents willing to answer questions, which held true not only for Christian sites but also in areas where development is increasing and the existence of sacred sites is controversial.
31 4.2.5. Own observations and data gathering
In addition to the interviews, own observations contributed to the data. The observations build on non-structured informant interviews; excursions with key informants; and visits to temple sites across the city. A GPS was used to map out the sacred sites that were visited during the study. To get an understanding of how common trees really are on sacred sites, a field trip was done where all sacred sites along a line that stretched from the city centre to its outskirts were registered. Their GPS positions were taken and the number and species of trees were roughly estimated. As the survey was done along busy roads it was often not possible to stop and take exact note of the number or species of trees, so the data should be treated as a grounded estimation but not as a biological guide. An interpreter fluent in five local languages was present during all the survey-based interviews and the key informant interviews. The interpreter had good knowledge about environmental topics from previously having worked extensively with academics, and had an extensive social network that facilitated the work with identifying and contacting key respondents. However, this also put demands on the researcher to actively decide which were desired respondents and also use other sources to find them. In the key informant interviews, where the respondents answered to open- ended questions, the translation was done simultaneously with the interview to enable follow-up questions. The interviews where not recorded since the environment in which the interviews were held typically had too much background noise. Pre-written papers with questions were used for taking notes and as soon as possible after the interviews, the notes were transferred to an excel-sheet for the answers to the survey-like interviews, and a word-document for the key informant interviews. More statistics-oriented programs such as SPSS were not used as the surveys contained a large number of open-ended questions. Despite the test surveys, minor changes to the questionnaires were done as the work developed, as some questions were not applicable to all religious sites and additions to the response alternatives were added.
32 5. Results
All five focus sites had a mix of trees on the compound, ranging from traditionally used trees such as canopy- or fruit trees on the Hindu- and Muslim sites, to traditionally used trees being mixed with ornamental on the Buddhist- and Christian sites. The study found that trees on sacred sites can have two meanings, depending on the religion in question; at Hindu sites trees themselves are sacred, whereas at the Muslim and Christian sites they are an integral part of places that are sacred. It was also found that trees have played a significant role beyond religion for Hindus in Bangalore culturally and socially.
5.1. Sacred trees in a changing social context
In order to explore how important sacred sites may be for the support of ecosystems in the city, a transect was done as one of the major roads was followed for eight kilometres from the city centre to rural Bangalore, and all the sacred sites seen along the road were mapped on a GPS. It should be said that some sites were further away from the road than others (but still visible from the vehicle); the sites on both sides of the road were registered; and some sites were practically joined together. However, 34 sites in total were registered which gives an average of 235 metres between the sacred sites, or 4 sacred sites per kilometre. The result as presented in Table 4, indicates that sacred sites are common in the city and moreover, that the majority of sacred sites regardless of religion have trees on them.
33 Table 4: The results from the city transect, showing numbers of sites per religion and the approximate number of trees on each site, along one major road from central to rural Bangalore
Site religion Location, urban Trees in total Sites with no Average amount gradient; (approximate) trees of trees on the (number of sites) sites Hindu Central: 6 1 8 Central to peri- urban: 2 129 Peri-urban: 7 Rural: 1 Hindu sites, total: 16 Muslim Central: 3 98 1 16 Central to peri- urban: 0 Peri-urban: 3 Muslim sites, total: 6 Christian Central: 7 201 16 Central to peri- urban: 1 Peri-urban: 0 Peri-urban to rural: 1 Rural: 3 Christian sites, total: 12 Buddhist None None ?
Sites in total: 34
Table 4 shows that the majority of sacred sites along the transect route were Hindu and that most of them had a few trees. The Muslim and Christian sites had a higher average number of trees on the site but the sites were fewer. Observations further showed that trees can be more or less common on the different types of sacred sites; not all Muslim mosques, for example, had trees whereas the Muslim burial grounds were relatively large tree-clad areas. Although the Christian sites had the highest average number of trees, many church compounds covered large areas and the density of trees may thus not have been as high as on other sites. All observed Christian sites had some trees, though, whereas a few Hindu temples and mosques were observed without any trees at all.
The mix of greens as individual sacred trees and a number of trees on sacred sites may support different ecosystem functions or fill different purposes. The individual trees that were scattered across the city may provide important habitats especially for birds and insects. The larger green
34 sacred sites in the city, most notably the Muslim graveyards, were fewer in numbers compared to the individual sacred trees but provided larger habitats for plants and animals. The differences in characteristics of the sites, if it is individual trees or larger green areas with more trees, can in addition to providing different possibilities for ecosystem support, also affect people’s experiences on the sacred sites or around the sacred trees.
In the peri-urban to rural and in the rural areas, the land surrounding temples, dargahs and churches were found to commonly be covered with different kinds of canopy trees, in contrast to the often farmed land beyond. As reported by key informants (FS1, FS3, K9, K18), as well as in literature, the Hindus in and around Bangalore hold a wide variety of species as sacred. Examples include the members of the Fig tree family (Ficus religiosa (Peepal), Ficus benghalensis (Banyan tree), Ficus racemosa (Cluster Fig Tree); Butea monosperma (Flame of the Forest); and Malia azadirachta (Neem). The sacred trees include, but are not limited to, the nine Navagraha trees (planet trees, tree species that correlate to certain planets) and the 27 Nakshatra Vanas (star trees or trees that correlate to certain stars, see Appendix 4, Table 4, and Chandrakanth et al. 1990). According to key informants (K18, K19), trees’ sacredness does not always necessarily correlate directly to religion but rather to other characteristics that have made the tree or the tree species important for humans throughout the ages. Sacred trees can thus entail tree species that live long; have medicinal values; can be used as a food source; have large canopies that provide shadow; or play key roles in the ecosystems. Trees were further found to historically, geographically and socially having played central roles in societies in and around Bangalore.
During fieldwork it was observed that the most extensive development took place in the peri-urban areas, where old low-rise infrastructure was replaced by taller buildings predominantly with flats but successively also with restaurants, shops, internet cafés and other that follow with people’s increasingly urban lifestyle. Some people did not have time or were prevented by other factors to adapt, resulting in a mix of rural and urban lifestyles in the peri-urban areas. As one key informant described it; “the city expands like an amoeba and encapsules the rural. The people used to a traditional lifestyle do not have time to adjust or adapt and end up continuing their traditional lifestyle inside the city” (K22). Key informants also told of how farmers sold their lands to instead work in the city or buy land further away from the city (K1, K23). Observations showed that sacred sites in the peri-urban to rural areas were predominantly Hindu and worshipped trees or small temples underneath canopy trees like Peepal, Peepal and Neem, or
35 Banyan were common. The sites could also include temples built a little away from the trees and a grassy compound; or a Navagraha garden with a small temple on the compound and canopy trees outside. However, the trees in the peri-urban areas that were not visibly worshipped were commonly being cut down in order to make space for roads and buildings (K18, K19, and K12).
5.1.1. Tree worshipping at the Hindu sites
Two types of tree worshipping at Hindu sites were found. The first one was where one or two individual trees were the object of devotion; predominantly the large canopy trees Peepals or Peepals together with Neem trees. The two trees were according to tradition often married, which was believed to bring luck and thus often grew next to each other. People tied threads around tree trunks, hung flower garlands on the trees or left framed images of deities by the trunk of sacred trees. Such visual expressions of devotion, mainly of leaving images, were powerful means of protecting a tree from being cut down. As discussed by key informants (K12, K22), the acts could have different reasons and meanings; it may have been a way for people from poorer groups in society to claim a piece of land by protecting the tree, or people may have been morally bound to not throw away a deity image and they thus rather place it by a sacred tree. In the peri-urban and rural areas, Banyan trees (Ficus benghalensis) were found as common objects of devotion but were most likely too space demanding to grow in the central city, why they were rarely found there.
The second type of tree devotion by Hindus was where trees had been planted on larger temple compounds. On those sites there were normally a large Peepal as well as fruit-bearing trees; traditional medicinal plants; and/or Navagraha gardens, with nine trees of specific species representing nine planets (see Appendix 4, Tables 2 and 3) which was a result of the inclusion of astrology into Hinduism. Some temples had a mix of two or all three types of trees, plants and gardens. The two types of tree worshipping were related. Worshipping of one tree could develop into the construction of a temple and subsequently a temple ground with for example a Navagraha garden (further discussed in 5.3.3, the dynamics of Hindu sacred sites and related conservation potential).
It has been discussed, by for example Nugteren and Baindur, how the modern and the traditional as well as science and beliefs co-exist, which findings in the field study support. One example is the
36 strong protection that visible tree worshipping provides. Another is the construction of Navagraha- or Nakshatra gardens in parks around the city (as stated by K10) and a third is the initiative to plant trees of traditional species in new layouts (K18). The results indicate that the traditional values are maintained amongst the people but the ways of expressions change and adapt in accordance with the city development. Furthermore, the worshipping of trees is done by ‘common people’ but the decisions not to fell worshipped trees or interfere with temple grounds for the benefit of construction works are taken my authorities (observation point 493, FS1, FS2, FS4). This indicates that traditional values are, to an extent, transferred into decisions by politicians and other authorities.
5.1.2. Other culturally significant trees for Hindus: Gundu topos and heritage trees
Gundu topos were tree-clad copses of sizes varying from a handful of trees up to tens of acres, or heritage trees, important individual trees (see fig. 7). The Gundu topos consisted of fruit-yielding trees or large canopy trees and still existed in a few numbers in one of the more recently urbanized areas of Bangalore, the Whitefield area, but most of them grew in the rural areas. They had traditionally been used to provide food; shadow for herders; and when the trees had grown around water bodies they had naturally purified the water, which people and cattle had used. Annual festivals and fares were historically held in Gundu topos. The Gundu topos often consisted of trees belonging to sacred species but were not necessarily sacred themselves in a religious sense.
37 Trees of religious, social and cultural importance for Hindus
Sacred trees Gundu topos Heritage trees
Worshipped, believed Annual fares for local Social and to hold special powers. products. Provision of geographical village Grow independently or food, water, shelter. centre point. Rural on temple grounds Few exist in Bangalore areas
Wide variety of Nine species. Belong Sacred species, typically species. Sacredness to sacred species Ficus. Traditionally derived from historical and/or heritage trees. worshipped. One in each use and myths. Not worshipped. village.
Figure 7: Three categories of traditional significance of trees in Hindu culture
The concept of ‘heritage trees’ refers in its widest sense to describe trees that have traditionally grown in the centre of villages and been the social as well as geographical centre point. The trees belong to species that can grow several centuries old and that have been a part of the human societies for a long time, thereby being a part of the humans’ heritage. Low walls, built some metres away from the trunks, surrounded the tree trunks. Filled with soil, these walls or frames had become like square boxes with the tree growing in the centre. The trees and their walls or frames had been the centre point for the village. People had come there to socialize; the village judiciary system had those places as the setting for trials which the villages could attend; and fairs for the local farmers had been held in the shadow. The heritage trees still existed in some of the rural areas but had lost much of their traditional functions and during the time of the study mostly provided shadow (K18).
38 5.1.3. Meanings and values of trees on the Buddhist, Muslim and Christian sites
For the respondents on the Buddhist, Muslim and Christian sites, focus sites as well as key informant sites, trees were integral parts of the sacred sites rather than sacred resources per se. The Buddhist respondents held the Peepals of special value, to the extent special devotion to something is possible with respect to the religion (or philosophy). According to Buddhist teachings, it was under a Peepal that the man who became Buddha was enlightened and he spent most of his life underneath the tree. However, even if the trees themselves were not regarded as sacred, there were according to key informant FS10 devas, or deities, everywhere but they are only visible for those enlightened. Devas had the power to cause problems for people who become evil but also to protect those with wisdom. Protecting trees was said to be a good act that earned the devas’ respect. Beyond the cultural meaning, respondent FS10 acknowledged other ecosystem services provided by urban trees; “Without trees, survival is not possible. There is no fresh air and no oxygen. It is now too much deforestation and the weather balance changes. Rains and sunlight are extreme and no food can grow. 50-60 years ago there was green everywhere and there were no problems”.
Key informants on the Christian focus site and key informant sites were careful to point out that trees were not holy but that they were parts of God’s creation and therefore had some form of intrinsic value (FS11, K5). Observations showed that the trees, typically palm trees, silver oaks or pine trees, on the Christian sites at large were commonly gathered along the edges of the compounds; in corners of the buildings; or placed to frame for example a walk-way. Ornamental plants in pots were common and often had a more central position on the compound, such as along stairs leading into the churches. It seemed that the buildings were in focus on the Christian sites. Attention to plants was paid rather to their ornamental values than to for example the values of certain species from being traditionally used. According to a key informant (K5) in a church located in rural Bangalore, there had been more trees on the property some fifty years ago. After that the site had been developed in two sets, the most recent in 2009, and trees had been felled to give space for a new church. However, a garden had been constructed where small trees and ornamental flowers and bushes of varying origins had been planted.
Visitors to the Muslim focus site could not imagine the site without the trees. Like the visitors to the Christian site, the Muslim respondents did not consider the trees holy but saw them as a part of Earth, the larger creation, and that they should therefore be respected. The trees on the site were
39 predominately old, with a key informant (FS5) estimating the oldest mango tree to being some three hundred years. There were also smaller tree saplings and flowers that were planted on people’s graves, in accordance with a tradition that stated that a tree should be planted when a person had been buried and then be removed after three days (FS5, FS6), although the majority of saplings seemed to remain. It was even said in personal opinions by respondents, that trees should be planted instead of a headstone being erected; “The people are dead anyway, they do not care about a stone. It is better to do something that is also good for the environment”. At the same time, another key informant (FS6) emphasized that the management had no interest in actively working to conserve trees. All in all, the vast majority of respondents regarded tree protection on the sacred sites in the study as important independent of the trees' religious value.
5.1.4. Specific reasons for visitors to come to the focus sites
The studied focus sites were found to act as social, economical and ecological nodes. Virtually all of the visitors to the sacred sites belonged to the same religion as the sites represented but otherwise the visitors had a wide range of backgrounds both financially, professionally and ethnically. The sacred sites provide incomes for the priests or the religious leaders, the offer items salespeople, the maintenance workers, the security guards and the beggars in the tree shadow around the sites' entrances. The visitors arrived alone, with family members or with friends. The sacred sites thus provided forums for social interaction but also reinforced social structures and separation: the religious leaders were exclusively male; beggars stayed around the entrance to the sites; and dress codes or on one site even freedom of movement were different between females and males.
Purpose of visit
8 a) make a wish 7 b) Pray for problem relief 6 c) good luck 5 d) good health 4 e) blessing of oneself or object 3 f) festival or holiday g) marriage, family occasion 2 h) tradition or habit 1 I) other 0 j) honour person's memory Hindu temple 1 Hindu temple 2 Buddhist monastery Sufi dargah, Christian church k) Maintenance of grave Muslim graveyard
Figure 8: Responses by survey respondents at the five focus sites to the question “Why have you come to this site today?”
40
The survey respondents were asked what their purpose of visit to the sites were and pre-stated options were, as is shown is Figure 8, to make a wish; pray for problem relief; good luck; good health; receive blessing of oneself or an object; because of a festival or holiday; marriage or other family occasion; tradition or habit; other; honour a person’s memory; or maintenance of grave. As displayed in Figure 8, the Hindus came to the temples mainly to make a wish but that there were differences between the two temple sites; on site 1, making a wish and to get good luck were the two main reasons for visiting the temple. On site 2, wishing, praying for problem relief or something not in the pre-stated options were the dominant reasons for the visit.
On the three non-Hindu sites, making a wish was still common but the other reasons differed. Visitors came to the Buddhist site to attend Sunday lectures but there were also tourists visiting during other days to see the place and walk in the park. The visitors to the Muslim graveyard and dargah came because it was special days for families of deceased family members or because the visitors had it as a habit to visit the site. Little boys were observed coming to the site to run around and play. The Christians mainly attended church because it was special days; to make wishes; or to pray. On all sites except Hindu site 1, ‘other’ was a common reason for the visit, which includes for example transits across the compound, work and begging. Especially the Christian site had ‘othe r’ as a common response as many people transited across the compound since it was the shortest way between two large streets, and because there was a school adjacent to the church compound.
5.2. Generated and appreciated ecosystem services
Twenty visitors at each of the five focus sites were asked the open-ended question how the trees could affect their visits and the answers were interpreted as appreciation for ecosystem services. Since the MA groups of cultural ecosystem services –cultural diversity and identity; cultural landscapes and heritage values; spiritual services; inspiration for arts and folklore; aesthetics; and recreation and tourism (MA 2005)- poorly matched the answers provided by the respondents, new categories were made. Out of the seven new categories, five (Mental well-being; Religion; Physical well-being; Well- being, other; and Benefits for nature) can be seen as sub-groups to the MA’s cultural-; provisioning; or regulating ecosystem services categories. The remaining two groups are, in accordance with the
41 answers provided, labelled ‘No meaning’ and ‘No answer/No idea’. Table 4 displays the new categories, together with quotes from the respondents and the number of respondents on each site that provided answers to each of the categories (Appendix one presents the quotes in total per focus site).
5.2.1. Activities and the trees’ role during the visits
The survey respondents were asked what they did when they visited the sacred sites. The responses and observations, as displayed in Figure 9, show that the trees played a direct role in the Hindus devotional practice. The monks on the Buddhist site also actively involved the trees in their practice but to a lesser extent. The visitors to the Christian and Muslim sites did not involve the trees in their practice but regarded the trees an integral part of the sacred sites.
Activities during visits
20 a) Pray 18 b) Circumambulate trees 16 c) Circumambulate stones 14 d) Circumambulate other symbols 12 e) Receive blessing from priest 10 f) Tie thread around tree 8 g) Offer puja 6 h) Sprinkle milk (abhisheka 4 I) Shave head (tonsure) 2 0 j) Socialize Hindu temple 1 Hindu temple 2 k) Other
Figure 9: Responses on the two Hindu focus sites to the question “What do you do during the visits?”
The visitors to the Hindu sites circumambulated trees; circulated on the spot in front of trees; touched trees or the ground in front of them; and poured milk over trees and naga (snake) statues. The actions were directed by previous recommendations by the individuals’ astrologers, based on the people’s horoscopes; and the priests on-site who based their recommendations on the purpose of the visits. An equal number of people on the two Hindu sites stated that the trees provided peace of mind and that they had a religious significance, meaning that gods lived in the trees; the trees could remove
42 badness or problems; and that wisdom could be attained by performing sacred rituals around the trees. On the Hindu site 2 respondents stated that they could use the trees for fitness, which relates to the religious rituals performed around and in front of trees. Fitness may also refer to the clean air that trees provided, which alone or together with silence and the possibility for meditation, created a ‘fresh mind’ for many visitors. Three of the Hindu respondents did not have an answer to- or did not know how the trees could affect their visit. This may indicate that not everyone understood the question. What is more surprising, however, is that two respondents on Hindu site 1 stated that the trees on the site had no meaning. This is especially interesting since the site consists more or less only of a Navagraha garden with shrines and statues of deities placed between selected trees.
As illustrated by Figure 10, The Muslim site was the largest green area in the study and was virtually covered with trees. The visitors to the Muslim site appreciated to a large extent the shadow and the silence on the site and they could not imagine the site without the trees, but the trees were not themselves held sacred.
a) Common (together) Activities during visits praying b) Pray alone 14 12 c) Leave flowers on grave 10 8 d) Maintenance 6 (work/private) 4 e) Walk around the site 2 f) Read Koran 0 Sufi dargah, Muslim graveyard g) Other
Figure 10. Responses on the Muslim focus site to the question “What do you do during the visits?”
43 Activities during visits a) Chant Activities during visits 18 b) Meditate 16 16 14 c) Maintenance 14 a) Mass 12 12 b) Pray alone 10 d) Pray 10 c) Socialize 8 8 e) Other d) Read Bible 6 6 4 4 e) Confession f) Meditate around tree 2 2 f) Other 0 0 Buddhist monastery g) Leave flowers to Buddha Christian church
Figures 11 and 12: Responses on the Buddhist and Christian focus sites respectively, to the question “What do you do during the visits?”
Those out of the respondents on the Buddhist site who were monks and thus lived on-site, involved the trees directly in their daily lives and religious practice, by meditating around the Peepal once per day and by having maintenance of the garden as a part of their work schedule. The monks and the visitors to the Buddhist site were similar to the Hindus in that trees were seen as sacred resources: Buddha planted trees which made them a symbol of holiness and made the people feel the presence of Buddha; they made visitors feel more devotion; and they were sites for prayers. Thus, as illustrated in Figure 11, even though the Buddhists do not worship trees, they were actively involved in the practices and held a special value in the beliefs.
For the visitors to the Christian site, trees on the compound were an integral part of the aesthetics on the site but were not actively incorporated in the visitors’ religious practice. As shown in Figure 12, the activities did not directly include the trees. However, observations showed that the visitors still benefited from the trees as a shrine next to the church had an ornamental flower-clad tree in front of it and a few metres away was a large canopy tree, which gave shadow to the visitors.
The survey respondents were asked how the trees could affect their visits. A selection of the responses are included in the paper (see Table 4), since out of the questions asked in order to reach the values or meanings that people attached to the trees, that question gave the most straightforward answers. The full questionnaire can be seen in Appendix 6, Table 1. The survey showed that amongst the ecosystem services generated by the trees, the vast majority of the respondents appreciated the cultural ecosystem services, such as that the trees allowed them to connect with their god; that the trees were beautiful; or that they made people happy. This, however, is not surprising as the sites are places for worship, which can be seen as a component of culture.
44 Ecosystem services, other than cultural, that were appreciated commonly referred to provisioning services such as shadow; fresh air; fruits; greenery and oxygen. Regulating services were also appreciated; pollution control, coolness and silence. As Table 4 shows, the trees were also said to improve health and one respondent said that ‘living plants equals a living planet’. It is interesting to see how several respondents connected positive experiences or feelings with other types of ecosystem services than cultural. The trees on the sacred sites were said to provide silence, oxygen and cool; and thereby make one’s mind fresh and create a relaxing atmosphere.
Table 4: Responses to the question: “How can the trees affect your visit?” H=Hindus, B=Buddhists, M=Muslims, C=Christians Groups Correlating Quotes from survey responses Site religion, (own MEA (number of definition) ecosystem respondents) services category Religion Cultural “When we make wish, it realizes” (H), Rounding Hindu (8+4), Ficus gives good knowledge”(H), “I see God in Buddhist (7), every tree”(H), “Petals [laid] on Buddha symbolizes Muslim (1), life, fresh becomes old, dies. We should be like Christian (0) flowers, give fragrance when we can”(B), “Lovely. Calm and silent and I can pray to my God”(M)
Mental Cultural “Peace of mind”(H), “Make me feel joyous and Hindu (4+5), well-being gives relief”(H), “Health, relaxing, quiet, clean Buddhist (4), air”(B), “Nice place to meditate”(B), “Feel Muslim (4), happy”(M), “Relief, peace, calmness” (M), “More Christian (3) trees would make a more beautiful atmosphere and would make me love the place more”(C), Physical Cultural/ “Makes me feel health”(H), “Make me sit for ten Hindu (2+2), well-being Provisioning minutes and relax”(H), “Oxygen, life. Good for Buddhist (1), body”(H), “When I revolve around trees I get good Muslim (3), health”(H), “Gives peace and health, lungs Christian (6) area”(B), “Shadow, feel like sleeping, also sit under the tree”(M), “Cool, energizes me since I am under the shadow”(C), “It’s a lot cooler when trees are around. It’s a natural atmosphere altogether”(C) Well-being, Cultural “Makes me feel good”(H), “Feel most of my Hindu (1+2), mixed problems are being solved”(H), “I feel lightened Buddhist (3), from my pains and sorrows”(H), “Looks good”(B), Muslim (6), “Good feeling, relaxation; makes wood, good air; Christian (2) makes my mind fresh; makes me more fit”(M), “Nice effect. Good air, shadow, original
45 environment, peace of mind. It is life”(M), “Oxygen, beauty. No trees = deserted”(C) Benefits for Provisioning/ “Living plants = Living planets”(H), “Fruit, Hindu (2+5), nature Regulating shadow”(H), “Greenery, oxygen”(H), “Fresh Buddhist (2), air”(H), “Shadow, control of pollution, look Muslim (3), green”(B), “Good environment, cool”(B), Christian (1) “Coolness, good air”(M), “This is the only place where we can breathe nicely”(M), “Good air”(C) No Hindu (2+0), Buddhist (0), Muslim (1), Christian (3) meaning No answer/ Hindu (1+2), Buddhist (3), Muslim (2), Christian (5) No idea
The distinction between the categories of services and even the types of services within each category is fine and not always as strict as the figures make it appear. ‘Sit and relax’, for example, is closely connected to mental well-being, as relaxation implies a connection between the mental as well as physical state, but is put under the category physical well-being since sitting in a physical action. Likewise, many respondents acknowledged the interdependence of services and corresponding categories, such as “shadow, coolness, silence and peace of mind”, or “Good feeling, relaxation; makes wood, good air; makes my mind fresh; makes me more fit”. The latter quote is put in the category ‘well-being, other’ in order to reflect that several and largely interdependent factors are stated; mental- and physical well-being, as well as providing services (shadow) and regulating (coolness, silence). The same words can also appear in different categories depending on the context. ‘Coolness, peace of mind’ was interpreted as belonging to the ‘Mental well-being’ category, as coolness is mentioned in a context of an experienced mental state, whereas ‘Coolness, good air’ belongs to the ‘Benefits for nature’ category as coolness is mentioned in a context of a purely environmental state. ‘Invisible’ or indirect services may have not been acknowledged by respondents even if they enjoyed them. Stated services may be “shadow”, for example, which may create a stated “well- being” for a person who escapes the glaring sun. However, the shadow itself is dependent on a tree with leaves and roots, which supports the ‘indirect’ services of biodiversity and water purification but the latter two may be invisible, taken for granted or simply not noticed. The ecosystem services that were stated by the survey respondents should thus be seen as highlighted parts of a bundle of interconnected services, cultural as well as others, where only a few are mentioned.
46 5.3. The social and religious context for stewardship of sacred trees
As illustrated by Figure 13, the respondents in the surveys on all sites had a high belief in the power and influence of the sites’ local key people or institutions such as the committees, the religious leaders and the temple visitors themselves, either alone or together. The state and central governmental institutions were seen as largely separate from the sacred sites. The exception was Hindu site 1 where it was believed that power holding, as decision-making capacities, was fairly equally shared between the politicians and the local institutions/key people. This may be because an addition to the entrance of the sacred site was being constructed and the BBMP had been known to previously give financial support to development of sacred sites. Another possible explanation is that major construction work was planned for the area immediately outside of the temple grounds and the BBMP could have a stake in decisions regarding the temple site.
Actors perceived to have decision-making powers
16 a) Central government 14 b) State government 12
10 c) BBMP
8 d) Priest/leader 6 e) Temple, dargah, monastery or church 4 committee 2 f) Temple visitors
0 g) Land owner Hindu site 1 Hindu site 2 Buddhist Dargah, Christian church monastery graveyard
Figure 13: Responses to the question “Who do you think can make decisions of what will happen with this site?”. The respondents had the option to give several response alternatives.
It was apparent, however, that the respondents saw differently depending on which sacred site they were on, on their possibilities to act if there was a potential for the trees to be removed. Virtually all of the respondents said that they did not want the place to change and that the trees should remain. However, visitors to the Muslim site stated that they themselves would do everything they could to stop the trees from being removed, which is not reflected in the figure, whereas several of the visitors to the Hindu sites said that they would follow the decisions made by the committees. The
47 committees, in turn, based many of their decisions on advices by the temple astrologers according to key informants (K2, K3). There thus seems to be a discrepancy between the individual opinions amongst the visitors to the Hindu sites and the preparedness to act accordingly. The visitors to the Buddhist site largely trusted the monastery leaders and independent initiatives regarding trees that would go against the leaders were not supported. The visitors to the Christian site also trusted the priest and the temple committee, but some of the respondents there said that they would not allow changes to the trees and expressed the possibility of taking individual action. Such statements generally corresponded to the younger respondents. The strongest and most radical will to act for tree conservation was voiced by young respondents, as children or young teenagers, and they also proved to have a scientific knowledge about the trees, such as that the trees provide oxygen. Whereas this may hint at a possible environmental conscience amongst the city’s future population, one young respondent said that perhaps it would be difficult to act against removal of trees since there may be too many other things to be occupied by.
5.3.1. Religious governance structures
The committees and religious leaders on the focus sites were all parts of governance networks that were independent of those of the government. Table 5 depicts the governance structure of the Hindu temple sites. In Hindu temples, a committee decided over the local temple site, was in charge of development plans and managed the finances. According to the findings in the key informant interviews (FS4, K3), some consisted of around six to ten people and some of up to twenty often long-term members who had showed their devotion and loyalty by helping out on the site. At some sites, any new members to the committee were appointed by the present ones. At other sites, the visitors to the temples or people living in the surrounding communities (depending on the trust’s activities in the neighbourhood beyond the temple site) voted for the representatives.
Temple trusts were often said by visitors and the temple committees to 'own' the land where the temples were, which meant it was leased from the State on a long-term basis since the State practically always remained as the ultimate owner of land. Trusts could be set up by individuals who supported the construction of temples and thereafter committees could be formed, whereby the committee would take over the power over the sites (K22). Sometimes, however, the BBMP owned the land and thus became the managers also of the temple. That was, according to an informant (K23), the case for example with the Bull Temple, the temple that attracted the largest number of tourists in Bangalore.
48 Table 5: Governance structure of the Hindu temple sites
Religious Duties/Actions/Powers Appointed by Source of governing legitimacy body/agent Astrologers Advices people on temples Personal astrologers: individual Informal. to visit, actions to perform. customers, norm amongst Traditional belief, Advices temple committees parents to have their child’s common practice on site constructions. horoscope done. Temple astrologers: chosen by temple committees based on for example the astrologer’s reputation, fame and price Temple trust- Temple finances; Differs between sites. By voting Executive power committee employments; site by visitors and surrounding over the site as development. community members; or by well as being Some hand out Prasad, a appointment by present familiar to many small meal, to visitors after committee members, for visitors prayers example after long voluntary temple service Head priest, Perform blessings, prayers, Head priest and temple Visitors and Second priest ceremonies committee committees’ liking Temple May engage in maintenance Guided to temple sites by Limited powers visitors of temple grounds and astrologers, family or knowledge over temple site thereby one day become of temples’ individual committee member. Can characteristics such as devotion vote for BBMP-members. to certain god Purchase offering items
Churches, dargahs and masjids (mosques), as well as monasteries had similar governance structures with a religious leader and some form of managing committee, perhaps with an on-site manager. Appendix 5, Table 2, shows the Muslim religious governance structure which was a separate institution from the governmental up to State level, which also included a judiciary system.
The Christians and the Buddhists had similar governance structures with, same as the Hindus, internally appointed leaders on the site in the form of committees (or the likes) and religious leaders such as priests and head-priests that played a more or less active role in the management of the sites. The difference on the focus sites was that the leader, who was also the founder, of the Buddhist site had a clearly leading role over the centre and the administrative body but was increasingly giving power to the General Secretary. On the Christian site it seemed that the priest had power over the religious ceremonies, whereas the committee could decide over the everyday
49 management of the church. The government sometimes helped with money, when asked, such as for the then-ongoing construction of the new Buddhist university (FS10).
The Hindu and Christian committees worked for free, whereas the Muslim key people (the site manager and the WAKF-board representatives) were employed. The Buddhist monks that lived on- site had their private and professional lives naturally intertwined and were thus provided housing and food for their work, which included daily maintenance of the site.
5.3.2. The perceived importance of trees and respondents’ preparedness to act
The survey showed that the respondents on the Hindu focus sites attached the highest direct value to the trees in that they came to the sites to worship trees and they saw gods as living in the trees. As illustrated by Table 14, it was however the Muslim site that had the highest number of respondents willing to act to conserve the trees, if the site for some reason was to be altered, despite that the trees were not themselves held sacred.
If someone decided to change this site, what would or could you do?
14
12
10 Hindu site 1 Hindu site 2 8 Buddhist site 6 Muslim site 4 Christian site
Number of respondents of Number 2
0 Will not act No idea Expressed Positive towards Positive towards powerlessness conserving/ increasing conserving/ increasing trees, no stated trees, stated willingness willingness to act to act (money donation, plant something or protest) Respondents' perceived own powers to influence the management of the trees on the site
Figure 14. Responses by survey participants to the question “If someone tried to change this site, what would or could you do?”
Respondents on the Buddhist directly managed the trees by having gardening duties a part of their daily routine, which none of the other respondents did. The visitors to the Hindu sites provided, to an extent, an exception since their actions on-site included direct action with the trees such as
50 leaving puja items by their trunks or pouring milk on them. The majority of the Buddhist respondents also wanted the place to either remain as it were or to contain more plants. The majority of the respondents, however, did not state any possibility themselves to act. On the Christian site, the trees framed the compound and the respondents were thus physically the furthest away from the trees compared to the visitors to the other focus sites. The visitors did not consider the trees as holy; but they were amongst the most willing to actively engage in conservation of the trees on the site.
5.3.3. The dynamics of the Hindu sacred sites and related conservation potential
The study found that the sacred sites are dynamic and constantly evolving. On Hindu sites, this was expressed in visible infrastructural changes which were intertwined with simultaneous changes in the social structures. The devotion of individual trees could with time develop into larger sacred sites with temples and courtyards. This section draws strongly on visits the 75 sites other than the focus sites, selected to constitute a diversity range and a wider perspective on sacred sites in Bangalore, and accompanying key informants (K10, K18, K19, and K22).
The creation of a temple site could start with worshipping of one tree, commonly performed by one or a few locals. Such worshipping was typically expressed in framed images of deities being left by the tree trunk and flower garlands being hung around the stem. With time the site could attract more worshippers and collective efforts, monetary as well as practical, could enable development of the site. When that happened, the typical development seemed to be that the deity images got accompanied by a shrine holding inside it a statue of a deity; a concrete wall some 1-1,5 metres tall, was built around the tree trunk; and stone snake symbols were placed in close proximity to the trees or between the Peepal and Neem. As the worshipping of a sacred tree grew into a sacred site it could attract an increasing number of people, especially if the tree was ‘known’ to possess specific powers. A trus t could be set up by private initiatives, typically someone financially strong that had an interest in the site, for donations to the development of the site. Eventually a temple could be built, priests employed and a managing committee formed. According to key informants (K12, K22), the formation of a sacred site around a tree was even a way to claim land in the crowded Bangalore. During the process of infrastructural development, the protection of the tree as a taboo against felling the trees increased correspondingly. Visible worshipping of a tree, if the worshipping was
51 clearly ongoing and did not consist of a single image left years ago, was observed to be an effective protection of the tree against felling. Trees surrounded by concrete frames and trees that shadowed shrines were virtually untouchable; key informants told of how trees were left standing no matter what condition until they fell down by themselves (in one instance on a passing bus). However, the trees’ well-being was not in focus in the development process from a worshipped tree to a temple site. The concrete frames, when they had a ‘lid’ on that stretched up to the tree trunk from the walls, constricted the growth of the tree. Moreover, it was observed that a common practice was to cover the area around the tree and the statues with concrete, which –as most of central Bangalore’s land surface was also covered with concrete or asphalt- hindered water and air from reaching the soil. It also minimized the trees’ capacity to absorb storm water run-off. There was also a risk, according to key informants (K18, K22) and observations, that as the infrastructural transformation resulted in a temple, it could leave the trees vulnerable. In those cases where Navagraha gardens were developed, focus remained on tree conservation. In other cases, however, focus of the visits to sacred sites had been known to shift to the deity statues, shrines and the priests, giving the trees little more than a function as symbols of values and practices that were not incorporated in the present. In those instances where trees were physically somewhat distanced or separated from the temple, even though it was normally just with some metres, the trees were left vulnerable. According to information by key informants (K12, K14, K21, K22), as the pressure was increasing on the sacred trees in the central- but also in the peri-urban areas to give way for new roads, flyovers and buildings, trees that were not protected by visible worshipping were increasingly being felled.
52 6. Discussion
This study indicates that there is a large untapped potential among the general public in Bangalore for stewardship of urban trees. It will be argued below that sacred trees form important social- ecological memory. Hindu temples are abundant across the city and the trees on temple sites may thus play an important role in sustaining biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, although a high value is assigned to the trees, in particular the Hindu informants of the study did not have much confidence in their capacity to influence decision making regarding the trees. This may differ, though, among sites and a larger sample is required to understand this further.
Visitors to the sites in this study appreciated a number of ecosystem services generated by the trees. Not surprisingly, the majority of the services can be described as cultural. Contrary to most research on cultural services, the focus of the appreciated cultural ecosystem services was on spiritual and other cultural values rather than on tourism. Research like this on ecosystem services on sacred sites may provide a clear example and a new dimension, or at least substantially new insights, to the concept of cultural ecosystem services.
The design of the study, which included different interview models; different types of respondents; and a wide range of research sites, allowed a thorough exploration of ecosystem stewardship as belief systems and practice in Bangalore. It is, however, worth noting that the interview results or questions may have possibly looked different if the researcher had been more familiar with the cultural background of the communities in the study; respondents’ body languages; and nuances in the responses. However, approaching a new environment can also enable findings of new results because of the researchers’ and the respondents’ mutual lack of- or possession of different types of knowledge, assumptions and ways of interpretation. It could perhaps be argued that this is a multiple case study. However, it has been presented as an exploratory case study since the time spent on most of the research sites was too short to understand the specific situations and the paper rather explores the phenomena of stewardship potential as belief systems and practice (Yin 2003).
Finally, research on social-ecological memory is one way of increasing the understanding of the social part in social-ecological systems. The study thus explores both an underrepresented part of ecosystem services (the cultural) and the field within resilience theory that has been criticised for being weak (Hornborg 2009; MA 2005)
53 6.1. Beliefs and practices as tree stewardship in Bangalore
6.1.1. The social-ecological memory as a dynamic system
The study indicates that the trees themselves and the rituals and practices connected to the trees during people’s visits to sacred sites in Bangalore are two parts of a social-ecological memory (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010). Through rituals, whether it is religious rituals performed by Hindus or social rituals by others such as visiting a grave or maintaining allotment garden, people re-confirm and re-invent trees’ and plants’ role in their practice and memory, as well as every day life. The social-ecological experience entails people’s perceived closeness to gods or deceased family members, attained by visiting the sacred sites and performing certain rituals. Together with the physical experience of being close to the trees, whether it is enjoying the shadow; touching the trees; or enjoying the aesthetics, the experience creates the foundation for a social-ecological memory. The social-ecological memory is what the visitors to sacred sites experience on-site, but is also the reason, the effect and the determining factor for the visitors’ actions on-site. The visitors re- create and re-invent the memory by their actions. By sharing the memory, the visitors become parts of a community identity whose memory stretches beyond the present into the historical; the future; and mythological times. The individual becomes a carrier of values and norms that are determined by the memory and shared by a community.
The trees are physical manifests, the equivalent of ‘artefacts’ in social-ecological memory as described by Barthel et al (2010), and are parts of a continuous re-calling of traditional beliefs or meanings. The rituals, which include actions other than tree worshipping, on the sacred sites are a tool for the visitors to physically re-enact the memory and with inevitable changes, re-invent it. The social-ecological memory is both the result of previous practices and the foundation for future practice. Together with the trees it allows people to repeat their practice, while simultaneously support the urban ecosystems and thereby increase the human well-being, directly through the appreciated ecosystem services as well as indirectly by the bundled ecosystem services (Nugteren 2005).
The multitude of religious communities in Bangalore has provided a multifaceted protection for trees in the city as the sites showed to differ in sizes as well as species’ composition. The tradition of worshipping individual trees protects plant species that have existed in India for a long time, including keystone species such as the Ficus trees, protect the urban greens and work as green nodes in the city, which for example support flying animals.
54 The Muslim sites and especially the burial grounds provided larger habitats that can support other ecosystems as they could support a larger number of plants and animals, or perhaps different species, than the individual trees could. Since the areas were low in maintenance, it enabled a more natural selection of biodiversity than highly maintained areas, such as the city’s parks. The Christian churches showed differences in their support for ecosystems. The older compounds contained a larger number of endemic trees, whereas the newer compounds had a larger proportion of ornamental plants which often were contained in pots. The Buddhist site provided a high level of plant biodiversity in relation to the size of the site. Moreover, there was a mix of endemic, non-native, planted and natural trees and flowers. The result shows on three interesting points: Firstly, the different sites together create a network of urban greens, in different sizes and species, each with its own role in the city, and thereby they support a network of ecosystem services. Hindu sites are by far the most common but the other sacred sites are often larger. The large green spaces such as burial grounds can become growing grounds for new trees. On Hindu temple sites, the tradition of planting trees on Hindu sites directly supports the existence of certain tree species. Secondly, the worshipped trees and the sacred sites with trees support the city’s biodiversity and remnants of the image of Bangalore as a Garden City, which together tie into ‘common peoples’ memory’. The sacred sites are thus an integral part of the city both in people’s minds but also in terms of ecosystem services support.
Thirdly, the sheer number of sacred sites with trees in the city helps maintaining the social- ecological memory. However, that also implies that the reversed would be equally valid and it is thus crucial to let the trees that are presently there remain. There is an obvious risk of that if a process is initiated where trees are removed and replaced by stone symbols, or trees on burial grounds are felled, the foundation for the social-ecological memory and thus the incentive for protection of trees and thus the services they generate would simultaneously be weakened.
It seems that the sacred sites in Bangalore are resistant against changes from pressure by outside actors, however internal factors may make them vulnerable. The tree protection by worshipping on Hindu sacred sites has been shown to sometimes be weakened in favour of worshipping in temples and of stone statues. How the correlation between the extent of such development and the number of new, protected sites looks is unclear and greater samples of study sites are needed. The city’s tree-clad burial grounds run an obvious risk of losing their tree-cover in the future as the urban population increases and the demand for space for graves will increase. Even though the
55 respondents said they wanted the trees to remain and they were willing to take personal action to ensure that so would be, it is doubtful that conserving the trees would be more important than providing space for graves. This may be prevented by if there is a development of new burial grounds but the pressure on the centrally located burial grounds will decrease correspondingly to a development of new sites in the peri-urban or rural areas.
The sacred sites in the urban area are open for access to people from the poorest to the richest groups in society, every day of the year and thus enable a frequent and repeated experience of elements of a natural environment as a part of the urban landscape. The sites thus work as to creating a mental habit within people of seeing trees as an included part of the otherwise heavily developed and human-dominated urban area, which is shown by the respondents’ strong bias towards conserving the trees. Trees outside of the city that needs a conscious effort to be reached do not fill the same function. In a context of a heavily developed and urbanized area, the sacred sites with trees and other plants serve as a reminder of the ecosystems upon which humans depend. Also, by emphasizing the trees’ sacredness or the world as a divine construction, the visitors are also taught that that nature has an intrinsic value (Nugteren 2005; Tomalin 2010; Baindur 2009).
6.1.2. The social structures and the design of ecosystem stewardship
The sacred sites in Bangalore currently to a large extent serve as conservation sites of urban greens where the official power-holders to a large extent have focused on developing the built environment of the city. The persistence of sacred sites for tree protection seem to stem both from the size of the associated communities that come to worship and the sheer number of sacred sites (in the transect of this study, an average of 4 sacred sites with trees per km was found) but also from the virtual separation between the power holders on the sacred sites and the official, political power holders. The sacred sites have a strong foundation in the city by being valued by representatives from large communities. It seems that they have a benefit that other urban greens lack: they are so common that the large number of sacred sites with trees in the city helps to create the habit within people of seeing trees as parts of temple compounds and temple compounds as parts of the city. Moreover they are regularly visited by large numbers of people, especially compared to their sizes, and are open for virtually anyone. This means that they can attract people that are migrants to the city as well as those who are native and thus help to create a common identity of religious belonging, which can be presumed to be of importance in a city like Bangalore where the migration to the city is substantial.
56 The traditional governance structures where power was vested in key stakeholders and institutions on a village level and which supported sacred sites and for Hindus Gundu topos and heritage trees, was overnight changed with the BBMP’s takeover. The BBMP does today not have the exclusive power of development planning in favour of the BDA, which goes against the law; the centralized political power is a compartmentalized and confusing institutional structure with limited transparency and efficiency. The BBMP’s tendency to also outsource development project to private companies seems to have given more or less unlimited freedom for development projects in Bangalore with the main aim to maximize profits for the companies. The result is altogether that the urban greens are decreasing for the benefit of infrastructural development and that the remaining ones or those that are being constructed change character into Europe style-inspired parks.
The powers within the sacred sites were largely vested within the site committees; the religious leaders; and, on the Hindu sites, the astrologers (who may or may not visit the sacred sites). The power structures on the sacred sites seem to differ from those outside of the sites. The government seems to have little influence on the sacred sites except for possibly giving monetary contributions for development work. Even though the system is poorly democratic or transparent –the committees choose their own members; the priests are employed and work their way up from being a priest to being head priests; and the astrologers are professionals that the committees hire and are not physically on the sacred sites- it is thus far persistent. Furthermore, the sacred sites and places of worship are among the few public sites in Bangalore which are not managed and owned by the BBMP and are thus among the few places where the public actually can affect tree management, albeit not in a democratic way.
There seemed to be differences in the prerequisites for protection of the greens between the sites belonging to different religions. On the Hindu sites, the trees were the highest valued and it was said that there was no possibility of replacing trees with for example stone statues, but the visitors were also reluctant to go against decisions by the perceived power holders. The existence of the trees was thus highly dependent on the words by the astrologers, who committee members said they obeyed, and there is no transparency into their system of operating. There also seems to be little transparency into the work by the committees, at least for the temple site visitors. All in all, the imagined support by a large community to the trees on the sacred sites can be presumed to strongly help conserving the trees and keep other interests out. The Buddhists, too, had a strongly hierarchical society and were less inclined to act against power
57 holders’ decisions but since there are not many Buddhist societies in the city, the site has support from a wide range of people both regarding geographical but also religious backgrounds. The visitors to the Muslim and Christian sites were the most willing to act directly for conservation of trees. It was interesting to note that the opinions by respondents belonging to the same age group as children or young teenagers often provided similar answers and were not afraid to go against decisions by perceived power holders if the existence of the trees were threatened. They also often provided answers about the value of the trees that related to scientific values such as that trees provide oxygen. This implies that sources of knowledge as well as the religious community belonging create the theoretical foundation for the existence of sacred sites. The results imply that the potential for ecosystem service enhancement is nested within all of the groups of people associated with the sacred sites but also within the surrounding society.
6.2. Challenges and potentials for supporting ecosystem services in an urban context
The observations and interviews in the study indicate that the religious beliefs and practices, whether directly appointed to the trees and plants (Hindus) or indirectly by being focused on the site where the trees and plants grow (Muslims, Christians and Buddhists), support the existence of trees and associated ecosystem services in Bangalore. The variety of sacred sites provided different prerequisites for ecosystem support in the city which is important since plant- and species composition, as well as the composition of individuals within each species regarding sex and age, impact on the biodiversity and thereby the resilience of the ecosystems, which build on diversity on multiple levels (Colding 2007). The sacred sites often support local species and old-growth trees, even if variations occur (Neginhal 2006; Nagendra and Gopal 2010b). This plays an important role in sustaining the local ecosystems since the general tendency in the green area development in the city is to create parks with imported species, ornamental plants and water-demanding grass covered lawns. However, there are currently no obvious actors who can draw on and mobilise this potential for strengthened protection of the threatened urban trees of Bangalore (Nagendra and Gopal 2010b). The management by the BBMP is non-transparent and top-down, and there are no strong environmental organizations in the city. The informal network Hasiru Usiru (Anon) is one example: they organize protests against logging of trees but have limited funding and act mainly on an ad-hoc basis.
58 This study highlights one category of the ecosystem services, the cultural, but also how ecosystem services is an interlinked bundle where those connected to trees span through several, if not all, of the ecosystem service categories (Raudsepp-Hearne, GD Peterson, and Bennett 2010; Foley et al. 2005). Furthermore, the ecosystem services that urban trees provide benefits beyond the immediate local geographical area; below ground as for example water purification; to the atmosphere as oxygen provision and carbon dioxide absorption. It is crucial for a sustainable city development to include this factor in city planning but is in Bangalore today largely ignored.
By conserving trees and sites where trees can grow, people’s religious practices strengthen the ecological systems and thereby the ecological resilience in the urban context. However, the practices are not aimed at increasing or maintaining the well-being of the urban greens. The practice on Hindu sites to enclose the tree trunks in concrete ‘boxes’ or enclosed frames, isolates the ecosystems below ground from the systems above ground. The result is for example that trees’ growth is constricted; their ability to absorb surface water is affected which in turn affects the trees themselves but also their ability to mitigate flooding; and the interaction between ecosystems above- and below ground is limited, which may impact on the soil quality or the possibility for animals above ground to find food. As for the other sites, there seems to be a risk that the large green areas that burial grounds constitute may decrease in green cover and thus ecosystem service importance in the future, regarding cultural services as well as others. A demand for grave space may create a development similar to the rest of Bangalore, where today’s old and large trees become replaced by smaller, non- space demanding trees or plant species and the land is covered by asphalt, concrete or other man- made constructions (Nagendra and Gopal 2010a; Nagendra and Gopal 2010b).
The religious practices thus protect urban greens and build ecological resilience as diversity of ecosystem services seen on a large, city-wide scale, but may directly work as to weaken the resilience on a smaller, tree-specific, scale. The sacred sites are also dynamic sites in constant change where the balance that exists today between social and ecological values, manifested by large green spaces with old growth which support human social rituals, may shift towards a preference of the social. The stewardship of ecosystems aimed at tree conservation and human well-being through the provision of mainly cultural ecosystem services, is dependent on a social-ecological memory that is shared by individuals of different communities and manifested by urban greens with trees. The findings that there were sacred sites reserved for different purposes but all connected to
59 different religions, showed on how communities’ values are reflected in different designs of urban greens. The connection between community values and the design of urban greens is also highlighted in research on allotment gardens in Stockholm, Sweden (Barthel, Folke, and Colding 2010; Andersson, Barthel, and Ahrne 2007). This shows that the field of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas is closely related to management- and urban infrastructural design and applicable to several areas of the world, not only where religion is involved. As the memory is constantly re-enacted and re-invented, however, it is vulnerable to changes within the communities. Ecosystem stewardship in its desirable form is thus also dependent on an inclusion of conservation-aimed regulations from official policymakers. As cities become norm for an increasing and the major part of the world’s population, and India belongs to the countries with the largest population, creating a stewardship nested in multiple levels in society is crucial. This study shows that ecosystem stewardship built on the inclusion of people on grass-root level in society supports not only social inclusion and human well-being in its broadest sense but also ecological resilience.
60 7. Conclusions
So far, little attention has been paid to the connection between green spaces, ecosystems and religion in an urban setting. It also explores the spiritual dimension of cultural ecosystem services which is a hitherto weak field within ecosystem service research. Bangalore has in the study been used as one example of the global trend of an increased number of- and rapidly growing multimillion cities. The study has found that the wide spectra of religions and cultures in the city provide a multifaceted protection for urban greens, as single trees as well as larger tree-covered areas. Common people in the city are a vital aspect in stewardship of urban greens that is aimed at conservation of urban greens; enhancement of the urban ecosystem services; and well-being of the city’s population at large. It has also found that the appreciated ecosystem services in the urban area are intertwined with a net of ecosystem services that directly or indirectly benefit the immediate surroundings as well as the city at large. The large number of sacred sites with trees in the city helps re-creating a social-ecological memory, in which trees are a common part of sacred sites and the rituals; and sacred sites are an integral part of the city. The social-ecological memory in turn becomes the foundation of a desired stewardship of the urban greens. However, the social protection of the urban greens is not focused on well-being of the trees and is thus often insufficient for long-term conservation. Moreover, the stewardship is an ever-evolving system that is dependent on the stewards’ values, meanings and norms that are attached to the urban greens. Thus, if trees are felled in accordance to other values or norms within the community, the social-ecological memory and thus the foundation for a desired stewardship of the urban greens, will be weakened.
61 8. References
Andersson, Erik, Stephan Barthel, and K Ahrne. 2007. Measuring social-ecological dynamics behind the generation of ecosystem services. Ecological Applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America 17, no. 5 (July): 1267-78. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17708207. Anon. 1963. The Karnataka Forest Act 1963. http://karnatakaforest.gov.in/English/Acts_Rules/acts/KF_Act_1963.pdf. Anon. Hasiru Usiru. http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree felling/Hasire Usiru/background.html. Anon. Flowers of India. http://www.flowersofindia.net/. Anon. Constitution of India. http://india.gov.in/govt/constitutions_india.php. Anon. Karnataka State Board of Wakfs. http://karwakf.org/CitizenCharter.html. Baindur, Meera. 2009. Nature as Non-terrestrial : Sacred Natural Landscapes and Place in Indian Vedic and Purānic Thought. History 6, no. 2: 43-58. Bangalore Development Authority. BDA. http://bdabangalore.org/aboutus.htm. Barthel, Stephan, Carl Folke, and Johan Colding. 2010. Social–ecological memory in urban gardens—Retaining the capacity for management of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 20, no. 2 (May): 255-265. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.01.001. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959378010000026. BBMP. 2011. BBMP. http://www.bbmp.gov.in/. Bhagwat, Shonil A., and Claudia Rutte. 2006. Sacred groves: potential for biodiversity management. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4, no. 10 (December): 519-524. doi:10.1890/1540-9295(2006)4[519:SGPFBM]2.0.CO;2. http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/1540-9295(2006)4[519:SGPFBM]2.0.CO;2. Borgström, Sara T, Thomas Elmqvist, Per Angelstam, and Christine Alfsen-Norodom. 2006. Scale mismatches in management of urban landscapes. Ecology and society 11, no. 2: 16. http://www.mistra- research.se/download/18.61632b5e117dec92f47800074425/Borgstr�m+et+al+2006+Scale+ Mismatches+Urban+Landscapes.pdf. Chandrakanth, M. G., J. K. Gilless, V. Gowramma, and M. G. Nagaraja. 1990. Temple forests in Indiaʼs forest development. Agroforestry Systems 11, no. 3 (September): 199-211. doi:10.1007/BF00045899. http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/BF00045899. Chandrakanth, M.G., Mahadev G. Bhat, and M.S. Accavva. 2004. Socio-economic changes and sacred groves in South India: Protecting a community-based resource management institution. Natural Resources Forum 28, no. 2 (May): 102-111. doi:10.1111/j.1477-8947.2004.00077.x. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1477-8947.2004.00077.x.
62 Chandrakanth, M.G., and Jeff Romm. 1991. Sacred forests, secular forest policies and peopleʼs actions. Nat. Resources J. 31, no. c: 741. http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi- bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/narj31§ion=38. Chapin, F Stuart, Stephen R Carpenter, Gary P Kofinas, Carl Folke, Nick Abel, William C Clark, Per Olsson, et al. 2010. Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet. Trends in ecology & evolution (Personal edition) 25, no. 4 (April): 241-9. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.10.008. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19923035. Charmas, Kathy. 2005. Grounded Theory in the 21st Century: Applications for Advancing Social Justice Studies. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, ed. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, 507-535. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Colding, Johan. 2007. “Ecological land-use complementation” for building resilience in urban ecosystems. Landscape and Urban Planning 81: 46-55. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.10.016. Colding, Johan, and Carl Folke. 2001. Social Taboos: “Invisible” Systems of Local Resource Management and Biological Conservation“. Ecological Applications 11, no. 2: 584-600. http://www.esajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0584:STISOL]2.0.CO;2.
Costanza, Robert, Ralph DʼA rge, R udolf De Groot, S tephen F arber, M onica Grasso, B ruce Hannen, Karin Limburg, et al. 1997. The value of the worldʼs ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253-260. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/PROGRAMS/wr/hq/pdf/naturepaper.pdf. Davic, Robert D. 2003. Linking keystone species and functional groups: A new operational definition of the keystone species concept - Response. Conservation Ecology 7, no. 1. Denzin, Norman K., and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2005. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Ed. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Elmqvist, Thomas, Carl Folke, Magnus Nyström, G Peterson, Jan Bengtsson, Brian Walker, and Jon Norberg. 2003. Response diversity, ecosystem change, and resilience. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1, no. 9 (November): 488-494. doi:10.1890/1540- 9295(2003)001[0488:RDECAR]2.0.CO;2. http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/1540- 9295(2003)001[0488:RDECAR]2.0.CO;2. Elmqvist, Thomas, Edward Maltby, Tom Barker, Martin Mortimer, Charles Perrings, James Aronson, Rudolf De Groot, et al. 2010. TEEB Report Chapter 2 - Biodiversity , ecosystems and ecosystem services. http://www.teebweb.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=VdteUfY8umU=&tabid=1018&language= en-US. EMPRI. 2008. State of Environment Report: Bangalore 2008. Environmental Management. Bangalore. http://parisaramahiti.kar.nic.in/soerbangalore2008.html. Ernstson, Henrik. 2008. The Social Production of Ecosystem Services: Lessons from Urban Resilience Research‖. H. Ernston‖ s In Rhiz omia: Actors, Networks and Resilience in Urban Landscapes, PhD Thesis in Natural Resource Management, Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, no. September. http://www.steps- center.org/PDFs/Ernstson_2008_ms_SocProd_of_ES_67_THISTHIS.pdf.
63 Foley, Jonathan A., Ruth Defries, Gregory P Asner, Carol Barford, Gordon Bonan, Stephen R Carpenter, F Stuart Chapin, et al. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science (New York, N.Y.) 309, no. 5734 (July 22): 570-4. doi:10.1126/science.1111772. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16040698. Folke, Carl. 2004. Traditional Knowledge in Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society 9, no. 3. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art7/. ---. 2006. Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16, no. 3 (August): 253-267. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959378006000379. ---. 2010. How resilient are ecosystems to global environmental change? Sustainability Science 5, no. 2 (June 4): 151-154. doi:10.1007/s11625-010-0109-x. http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s11625-010-0109-x. Folke, Carl, F Stuart Chapin, and Per Olsson. 2009. Transformations in Ecosystem Stewardship. In Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship: Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World, ed. F. Stuart Chapin, III, Gary P. Kofinas, and Carl Folke, 103-173. New York, NY: Springer New York. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-73033-2. http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/978-0-387-73033-2.
Gadgil, Madhav. 1993. Biodiversity and Indiaʼs Degraded L ands. Ambio 22, no. 2: 167-172. http://www.jstor.org/openurl?volume=22&date=1993&spage=167&issn=00447447&issue=2& . Gadgil, Madhav, and V.D. Vartak. 1976. The sacred groves of Western Ghats in India. Economic Botany 30, no. 2: 152–160. http://www.springerlink.com/index/H85G4150068T6701.pdf. Ghosh, Jayati. 2010. Poverty reduction in China and India: Policy implications of recent trends. Ed. Anis Chowdhury. UN/DESA Working Paper No. 92. New York. http://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2010/wp92_2010.pdf. Holling, C S. 1973. Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4, no. 1 (November): 1-23. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245. http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245. Hornborg, a. 2009. Zero-Sum World: Challenges in Conceptualizing Environmental Load Displacement and Ecologically Unequal Exchange in the World-System. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 50, no. 3-4 (May 20): 237-262. doi:10.1177/0020715209105141. http://cos.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0020715209105141. Krishen, Pradip. 2006. Trees of Delhi: A Field Guide. Penguin Books India. Kvale, Steinar, and Svend Brinkmann. 2009. Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun. 2nd ed. Lund: Studentlitteratur. MA. 2005. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Ed. MA Board of Review Editors. Washington, DC: Island Press, Washington. http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf. McPherson, E. Gregory, David Nowak, Gordon Heisler, Sue Grimmond, Catherine Souch, Rich Grant, and Rowan Rowntree. 1997. Quantifying urban forest structure, function and value; the
64 Chicago urban forest climate project. Urban Ecosystems 1, no. 1: 49-61. http://www.springerlink.com/content/1083-8155/1/1/. Mills, L Scott, Michael E. Soule, and Daniel F. Doak. 1993. The Keystone-Species Concept in Ecology and Conservation. BioScience 43, no. 4 (April): 219. doi:10.2307/1312122. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1312122?origin=crossref. Nagendra, Harini, and Divya Gopal. 2010a. Street trees in Bangalore: Density, diversity, composition and distribution. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 9, no. 2: 129-137. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2009.12.005. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1618866709001046. ---. 2010b. Tree diversity, distribution, history and change in urban parks: studies in Bangalore, India. Urban Ecosystems (August). doi:10.1007/s11252-010-0148-1. http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s11252-010-0148-1. Neginhal, S.G. 2006. Golden Trees, Greenspaces and Urban Forestry. Bangalore: Navbharath Press. Nugteren, Albertina. 2005. Belief, bounty, and beauty: rituals around sacred trees in India. Leiden: Brill. Olsson, Per, Lance H Gunderson, Steve R Carpenter, Paul Ryan, Louis Lebel, Carl Folke, and C S Holling. 2006. Shooting the Rapids : Navigating Transitions to Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology And Society 11, no. 1. Pani, Narendar. 2009. Resource cities across phases of globalization: Evidence from Bangalore. Habitat International 33, no. 1 (January): 114-119. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2008.05.007. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0197397508000428. Raudsepp-Hearne, C, GD Peterson, and E M Bennett. 2010. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107, no. 11 (March 16): 5242-7. doi:10.1073/pnas.0907284107. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20194739. Savard, Jean-Pierre L., Philippe Clergeau, and Gwenaelle Mennechez. 2000. Biodiversity concepts and urban ecosystems. Landscape and Urban Planning 48, no. 3-4 (May): 131-142. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00037-2. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0169204600000372. Sudhira, H, T Ramachandra, and M Subrahmanya. 2007. Bangalore. Cities 24, no. 5 (October): 379-390. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2007.04.003. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0264275107000637. Tomalin, Emma. 2010. Bio-Divinity and Biodiversity : Perspectives on Religion and Environmental Conservation in India 51, no. 3: 265-295. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3270584. UN-HABITAT. 2006. Urbanization Facts and Figures. Worl. Vancouver/Kenya. http://www.unhabitat.org/cdrom/docs/WUF1.pdf.
---. 2008. State of the Worldʼs Cities 2010/2011 - Cities for all: Bridging the Urban Divide. Ed. Thierry Naudin, Rasna Warah, and Darcy Varney. State of the Worldʼs Cities2 . London: Earthscan. http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss/listItemDetails.aspx?publicationID=2917.
65 WCED. 1987. Our Common Future: Towards Sustainable Development. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. http://www.un- documents.net/wced-ocf.htm. Yin, Robert K. 2003. Case Study Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Young, RF. 2010. Managing municipal green space for ecosystem services. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 9, no. 4: 313-321. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2010.06.007. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1618866710000543. Zérah, Marie-Hélène. 2007. Conflict between green space preservation and housing needs: The case of the Sanjay Gandhi National Park in Mumbai. Cities 24, no. 2 (April): 122-132. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2006.10.005. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0264275106000990.
66 9. Appendices
Appendix 1. Appreciated ecosystem services as generated by trees
The following tables display the total number of responses to the question “How can trees affect your visit?” and the responses are interpreted as ecosystem services appreciated as generated by trees.
Table 1: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Hindu focus sites
Category Correlating Quote Site MEA ecosystem religion, services category (total number of responses) Religion Cultural “Feel like circulating around tree”, “Holy, godly Hindu and there are trees for each planet, each planet (8+4) takes a problem. Pray to take out my problems”, “Takes off badness, fill in faith”, “Brings good prospects in my life”, “When we make wish, it realizes”, “Our wish will get realized”, “Rounding Ficus gives good knowledge + peace of mind meditating”, “Feel like circulating around tree” “Pleasant feeling, I see God in every tree”, “See God in it”, “Sacred feeling”, “Milk cleanses soil” Mental Cultural “Peace of mind, looking at the tree gives relief”, Hindu well-being “Attract”, “These trees help me concentrate”, (4+5) “These trees make me feel joyous and give relief”, “Peace of mind, health, relaxing, quiet, clean air”, “Shadow, coolness, silence, peace of mind”, “Peace of mind” “Peace of mind” “Feel happy with trees” Physical Cultural/ “Good weather and make me sit for ten minutes Hindu well-being Provisioning and relax”, “Makes me feel health”, “Oxygen, life. (2+2) Good for body”, “When I revolve around trees I get good health” Well-being, Cultural “Makes me feel good”, “Feel most of my Hindu other problems are being solved”, “I have a lot of pain. (1+2) When I come here I feel lightened from my pains and sorrows” Benefits for Provisioning/ “Living plants = living planets! Belief that it Hindu nature Regulating brings good”, “Fruit, shadow”, “A super (2+5) environment”, “Greenery, oxygen”, “Fresh air”, “Shadow, control of pollution, look green”, “Get full of oxygen”
67 No Hindu meaning (2+0) No answer/ Hindu No idea (1+2)
Table 2: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Buddhist focus site
Category Correlating Quote Site correlating MEA ecosystem religion, to survey services category (number of responses responses) Religion Cultural “Buddha planted trees. Petals on Buddha Buddhist symbolizes life, fresh flowers become old and die. (8) We should be like flowers and give fragrance while we can”, “I feel good vibrations”, “Feel more devotion”, “Prayer and shelter”, “Symbol of holiness”, “Makes me feel the presence of Buddha”, “Special for us”, “Bless the trees” Mental Cultural “Fresh air, nice place to meditate”, “Can stay Buddhist well-being amongst trees. Peace, quiet”, “Peace of mind”, (4) “Gives good weather and peace of mind” Physical Cultural/ “Gives peace and health, lungs area” Buddhist well-being Provisioning (1) Well-being, Cultural “Feel very good”, “Looks good”, “Feel good” Buddhist other (3) Benefits for Provisioning/ “Shadow, control of pollution, look green”, “Good Buddhist nature Regulating environment, cool” (2) No Buddhist meaning (0) No answer/ Buddhist No idea (3)
68 Table 3: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Muslim focus site
Category Correlating Quote Site MEA ecosystem religion, services category (number of responses) Religion Cultural “Lovely. I can pray to my god”, Muslim (1) Mental Cultural “Feels different, peace of mind, relaxing”, “Peace Muslim (4) well-being of mind and feels relaxing under the shadow”, Relief, peace, calmness”, “Feel happy” Physical Cultural/ “Good affect, good air (oxygen) to relax”, “Good Muslim (3) well-being Provisioning feeling, relaxation”, “Shadow, feel like sleeping, also sit under the tree” Well-being, Cultural “Good feeling, relaxation. Makes wood, good air. Muslim (6) other Makes my mind fresh. Makes me more fit”, “Looks beautiful, feel good, nice to see them”, “Nice effect. Good air, shadow, original environment, peace of mind. It is life”, “Comfortable, feel good, fresh air”, “Good affect, coolness”, “Not noticed. Pleasant” Benefits for Provisioning/ “Good breeze, coolness”, “Coolness, good air”, Muslim (3) nature Regulating “Good environment, everywhere there is smoke. This is the only place where we can breathe nicely” No Muslim (1) meaning No Muslim (2) answer/No idea
69 Table 4: Ecosystem services appreciated by visitors to the Christian focus site
Category Correlating Quote Site MEA ecosystem religion, services category (number of responses) Religion Cultural Christian (0) Mental Cultural “Beautiful atmosphere would make me love the Christian well-being place more”, “We feel good, pleasant, calm and (3) quiet”, “Gives me peace of mind, cool air, pleasant” Physical Cultural/Provisio “Place to sit and relax”, “It’s a lot cooler when Christian well-being ning trees are around. It’s a natural atmosphere (6) altogether”, “Through breeze”, “Cool, energizes me since I am under the shadow”, “Some connection I have with them. I get cool air”, “Gives cool breeze” Well-being, Cultural “[Trees] give a pleasant look to this place”, Christian other “Oxygen, beauty. No trees = deserted”, (2) Benefits for Provisioning/Reg “Good air” Christian nature ulating (1) No Christian meaning (3) No Christian answer/No (5) idea
70 Appendix 2. Transect result: religious sites, location and trees
The table in appendix 2 shows the transect results. The city transect was done by one of the main roads being followed for some eight kilometers, from the city centre to rural Bangalore. The sacred sites that were spotted along the way, a total of 34, were marked with a GPS and the amount and species of trees was written down. Note that the details are approximate, as the observations were by a non-biologist and many were done from a moving vehicle.
GPS- Site Location, Trees, Tree species, examples point urban approximate gradient number (not including ornamental bushes and flowers) 453 Christian Central 50+ Ficus benjamin, Ashoka (Saraca indica), Church, Bamboo, pine trees, Dwarf date palm Academic centre (Phoenix roebelinii), Pink trumpet tree (Tabebuia impetiginosa) 454 Muslim Dargah, Central 30+ Mango (Mangifera indica), Coconut palm burial ground, tree (Cocos nucifera), palm tree (date mosque type), Ficus benjamin 455 Christian Central 15+ Gulmohar, Peepal (Ficus religiosa), (catholic), Ashoka tree (Saraca indica), ornamental Cathedral and palm trees school 456 Christian Central 15+ Gulmohar, Dwarf date palm, ornamental (catholic), bushes and flowers Church and community centre 457 Hindu temple Central No - 458 Hindu temple Central 5 Peepal, Raintree (Albizia saman) 459 Hindu temple, in Central 15 Peepal, Ashoka tree park 460 Christian church Central 5 Temple tree (Plumeria rubra, Frangipani), Silver oak (Grevillea robusta), Peepal 461 Muslim, Hindu Central 50*3 Raintree, Gulmohar, Peepal, Bani and Christian (Millettia pinnata syn. Pongamia pinnata) graveyards 462 Hindu temple Central 1 Peepal 463 Christian Central 10+ Pink trumpet tree, Silver oak graveyard 464 Muslim mosque Central 5+ Peepal, Raintree, Guava, Bani, Ashoka tree 465 Hindu temple Central 2 Peepal, Neem 466 Christian church Central 5 Temple tree, Raintree, Ashoka tree 467 Christian Central 7 Gulmohar, Raintree, Coconut palm tree,
71 college, spiritual Peepal, Teak (Tectona grandis), Pine tree, teaching centre Chickoo (Manilkara zapota) 468 Christian church Central to Up to 10 Gulmohar, Ashoka, Teak, ornamental peri-urban plants, Raintree, Coconut palm tree 469 Hindu temple Central to 8 Peepal, Silver oak, Banana palm tree peri-urban (Musa), Mango tree, Lemon tree (Citrus limon), Sugarcane, Sun tree (Calotropis gigantea), Curry tree (Murraya koenigii) 470 Hindu temple Central to 1 Peepal peri-urban 471 Hindu temple Peri-urban 1 Peepal 472 Hindu temple Peri-urban 4 Peepal, Coconut palm tree, ornamental plants, Banana palm tree 473 Hindu temple Peri-urban 4 Ashoka, Silver oak, Acacia ferruginea, Peepal 474 Muslim mosque Peri-urban No - 475 Muslim dargah, Peri-urban 10 Raintree, Bani, Gulmohar, Ficus benjamin burial ground 476 Muslim mosque Peri-urban 3 Nilgiri tree (Eucalyptus globulus) 477 Hindu temple Peri-urban 5 Banana palm tree, Mango tree, Rain tree 478 Hindu temple Peri-urban 3 Coconut palm tree, Neem, Peepal 479 2 adjacent Hindi Peri-urban 20 Sea Almond (Terminalia catappa), temples to rural Ashoka, Acacia ferruginea, Peepal, Shami (Prosopis spicigera), ornamental plants, Tamarind (Tamarindus indica), Bani, Coconut palm tree, Jamun (Syzygium cumini), Neem (Azadirachta indica), Hibiscus (Hibiscus rosa-sinsensis), Papaya (Carica papaya), Temple tree, Bilva (Aegle marmelos), Ficus benjamin, Bani, Sun tree, Coconut palm tree 480 Christian Peri-urban 13 Tamarind, Raintree, ornamental plants, cathedral to rural Pine tree, Silver oak, Neem, Teak, Coconut palm tree, Peepal, Gulmohar 480 Christian Rural 5 Coconut palm tree, Jackfruit (Artocarpus (2) education heterophyllus), Subabul (Leucaena centre, prayer leucocephala), Saptaparni (Alstonia hall scholaris), Teak 481 Hindu temple Rural 10 Sampige (Michelia champaca), Ashoka tree, Silver oak, Gulmohar, Jamun, Neem, Teak, Nilgiri, Coconut palm tree, Subabul 482 Christian church Rural 16 Ashoka, Banana palm tree, Peepal, Coconut palm tree, Rain tree, Pine tree, Tamarind, Jamun, Sandalwood (Santalum album), ornamental plants, Royal palm tree (Roystonea regia), Hibiscus, Paper flower (Bougainvillea glabra), plus two unidentified Transect sites Hindu: 16 Muslim: 6 Christian: 12 Buddhist: 0 in total: 34
72 Appendix 3. Respondents other than survey participants
Table 1: Key informants
Site Type of site/ Urban Respondents’ position Respondent respondent in gradient ID study Hindu 1 Focus site Central Chief Priest FS1 Hindu 1 Focus-site Central Committee President FS2 Hindu 2 Focus-site Central Chief Priest FS3 Hindu 2 Focus-site Central Committee President FS4 Muslim Focus site Central Mutawalli FS5 Muslim Focus site Central Employed on-site FS6 Muslim Focus-site Central Manager of Trust Board FS7 associated Muslim Focus-site Central Assistant manager of Trust FS8 associated Board Buddhist Focus-site Central General secretary FS9 Buddhist Focus-site Central Treasurer FS10 Christian Focus site Central Parish Priest FS11 Christian Focus site Central Employed on-site FS12 Hindu temple Key informant Central Temple trust Director, K1 member of traditionally urban horticulturalist community Hindu temple Key informant Central to Chief Priest K2 peri-urban Hindu temple Key informant Central to Trustee, Trust Secretary K3 peri-urban Hindu temple Key informant Central to Trustee K4 peri-urban Christian Key informant Rural Parish Priest K5 Muslim dargah Key informant Rural Trust member K6 BBMP office Key informant Central Deputy Conservator of K7 Forest (North) Respondent’s Key informant Central Ex-Karnataka Pollution K8 home Control Board chairman; Professor and ex-Board member, IISc Respondent’s Key informant Central Indian Forest Service K9 home Officer (retired), author, environment group member Respondent’s Key informant, Central and Indian Forest Service K10 home, excursion observations rural Officer (retired) to planted forest Urban park Key informant Central Urban trees network K11 member
73 ATREE Key informant Peri-urban Researcher, tree expert K12 University of Key informant Central Professor, tree expert K13 Agricultural Sciences (UAS) Agricultural Key informant Central Head of Agricultural K14 Economics economics department; department, UAS professor Centre for Key informant Central Sacred groves expert; K15 Ecological Researcher Sciences (CES), Indian Institute of Science (IISc) CES, IISc Key informant Central Institution coordinator; K16 Sacred groves and tree expert, PhD CES, IISc Key informant Central Senior Scientific Officer, K17 Sacred groves expert Gundu topos Key informants Central to Tree expert, independent K18 and observation rural activist, urban trees network member Gundu topos Key informants Central to Tree expert, independent K19 and observation rural activist, urban trees network member Telephone Key informant N/A PhD, environment and K20 interview philosophy expert Telephone Key informant N/A Tree activist K21 interview Observation spots Key informant Central PhD-student; tree expert K22 Hindu temple Key informant Central Chief priest K23 Hindu temple Informant Central to Chief priest K24 peri-urban Hindu temple Observation Peri-urban to Employed on-site K25 rural Muslim mosque, Informant Central to Imam K26 graveyard peri-urban
74 Table 2: Informants (other) The table displays the respondents that fall in the category Informant, meaning that an open interview was held and/or the person did not hold a key position on- or in relation to a sacred site. Site Type of Area of Respondents’ position Respondent site/respondent Bangalore ID in study Hindu temple Observation Peri-urban to Employed on-site i1 rural Christian church Informant Rural Employed on-site i2 Respondent’s Informant Central Previously urban i3 office horticulturalist from horticulturalist community Peepal tree in Informants, Peri-urban to Auto rickshaw driver, i4 junction observation rural salesperson, bus passengers Respondent’s Informant Central Journalist i5 office
Table 3: Observation sites other than the focus- and transect sites
GPS-point Religion, site characteristics (if registered) 426 Hindu temple, lake 427 Heritage tree, lake 428 Lake, no temple 429 Muslim burial ground, dargah 430 Hindu, Old unused temple 431 Hindu temple 432 Hindu temple, tank (name of tank: Sampangi) 433 Hindu temple, compound with trees 434 Hindu temple, compound with trees 435 Hindu temple, compound with trees 436 Hindu temple, compound with trees 437 Lake, no temple seen 438-441 Western Ghats, not included in the paper 442 Unknown 443 Hindu temple 444 Lake (Karaga kunte) 445 Invalid
75 446 Hindu temple, compound with trees and bushes, Navagraha-type. Survey test site 447 Hindu temple, large Peepal. Survey test site 448 Christian church, compound framed by trees. Ornamental garden with flowers and bushes 449 Invalid 450 Invalid 452 Dargah, compound framed by trees 453-482 Transect sites 483 Tamil Church, some trees 484 Hindu temple, school and health clinic. Large tree-clad compound including a Navagraha garden 485 Mosque, large green compound 486 Peepal in junction by bus stop 487 Hindu roadside temple 488 Roadside sacred trees 489 Hindu temple by main road 490 Small temple by Peepal 491 Peepal with surrounding (tight) concrete wall 492 Two adjacent temple in road junction with Peepal, Neem and bushes between- and behind the temples 493 View over a low-income area under development. In addition to GPS-points 489-492, a Muslim burial ground could be seen as a large green area 495 Theatre play performed only on full-moon nights 496 Hindu temple 497 Planted forest 498 Planted forest, temple, trust, school. Forest managed by the trust and school students 499 Gundu topo recently felled for road widening. Three or four trees remained. One Peepal stood separate, closest to the so far constructed road; but was worshipped 500 Heritage tree, old Banyan 501 Flame of the Forest on school compound 502 Large roadside Peepal, previously worshipped and its bark had visibly been used for medicinal purposes 503 1000 year old Hindu temple (according to the locals)
76 504 Gundu topo of 54 old mango trees. Farming family nearby let cattle wander in the area 505 Hindu temple 506 Gundu topo on recently established graveyard. Apparently degrading according to space demand for new graves Observation Hindu: 32 Muslim: 4 Christian: 2 Buddhist: 0 sites in total: 41
77 Appendix 4. Species, symbolism, value and areas of use of sacred trees
Table 1: Historical tree symbolism
The historical symbolism that is attached to trees and described in the Vedic texts can be divided into five categories.
Adapted from Nugteren, 2005 Position Part of tree Connection to mythology Connection to history Verticality Roots, deep in soil Transcends ordinary scope, connect and crown, high up with divine. Belongs to the to the sky netherworld, human world and sky Centrality Branches in sky Village centre, mirror supporting geographically and roots. Trunk stable socially point Immortality Long life span, Yama, god of the dead, reside in yield fruits that trees, receive souls of the departed. grow into new Led to belief that spirits, gods and trees goblins reside in trees. Also illustration of samsara, cycle of life and death, necessary transitions Fertility All trees. Peepal Sexual symbolism: marriage of special: mighty Peepal (m) to Neem (f), phallic tree, long life, symbols, liquids (latex, resin or grows easily, many other). Snakes have the same seeds per fig symbolism Generosity Living trees and Timber, firewood, food, tree products medicine, ropes, liquor, utensils, musical instruments etcetera
78 Table 2: Navagraha trees, shrubs and grasses
Table 2 shows typical Navagraha garden characteristics. However, observations done during the study point to that the species and the trees’ position may in reality differ to an extent from one Navagraha garden to another. Literature browsing on the uses of the Navagraha plants has shown that there is a wide spectrum of different uses of the trees and the details below should thus be seen as non-conclusive examples.
Adapted from Chandrakanth et al. 1990
Position on Botanical Local English Asso- Values/meanings, uses site name name ciated planet
Front Saccharum Kadu Kans grass Kethu Medicinal grass and material for (north), left spontaneum kabbu mats, screens and thatch roofs
Front, Ficus Peepal/ Sacred Fig Jupiter Medicinal use against many centre religiosa Aswatha disorders including asthma, (Sanskrit) diarrhoea and inflammation. Other: circumambulation, meditation (religious practices), historically shadow for horses.
Front, right Achyranthes Uttarani Prickly Mercury Medicinal herb aspera Chaff Flower
Middle, left Acacia Banni, Rusty Saturn Food (the seeds). The word banni ferruginea Banni Acacia also refers to a portion of grain mara given to a labourer in requital of his services.
Middle, Calotropis Edda Crown Sun Host to insects and butterflies. centre gigantea flower/ Medicinal use against for example Gigantic scabies. swallow wort
Middle, Ficus Atti Cluster Venus Food (the seeds), traditionally for right glomerata/ Fig Tree/ travellers; the Indian macaque; and Ficus Goolar Fig butterfly caterpillars. Seeds are racemosa habitats for the fig wasps.
Bottom Cynodon Garika, Bermuda Rahu Medicinal grass. Antimicrobial and (south), left dactylon Garike, Grass, antiviral properties. Potential Ambate- Devil’s
79 hullu Grass etc. alternative to diabetes medications.
Bottom, Acacia Catechu Mimosa Mars Medicinal use (sore throats, centre catechu catechu, diarrhoea). Edible seeds (source of Black protein) for humans, goats and Cutch cattle. Ingredient in paan (Indian specialty). Wood used for furniture, tools and fire. Heartwood extract used in dyeing and leather tanning.
Bottom, Butea Muthuga Flame of Moon Wood soft, durable under water, right mono- the Forest, used for well-curbs and water sperma Bastard scoops. Flowers used to prepare Teak, Holi (a festival) colour. Parrot Tree
80 Table 3: The meanings of the Navagraha tree species
Adapted from Chandrakanth et al. 1990
Planet Tree species Characteristics
Jupiter Ficus Located North of the temple. Called ‘King of trees’. Used as ‘witness’, to religiosa which people ‘speak the truth’. Positive influences on destiny of people. Ward off the evil effects of Saturn, Mars and Rahu. Special worshipping day: Thursday.
Venus Ficus East of temple. Positive influence on individual’s finances. Special day: glomerata Frida y.
Mars Acacia South of temple garden. Exert evil influences on individuals. Special day: catechu Tuesday. It is avoided to begin activities meant to bring prosperity to their family on this day.
Mercury Achyrantus Shrub. Special day: Mercury. aspera
Rahu Cynodon Planet difficult to find the equivalent of in Western astronomy. Plant: dactylon grass.
Kethu Saccarum Planet difficult to find the equivalent of in Western astronomy. Plant: spontaneum grass. Especially used on solar and lunar eclipses to tide over the evil effects during eclipses.
81 Table 4: Nakshatra Vanas, Star trees
Literature browsing on the uses of the sacred species for this and subsequent tables has shown that there is often a wide spectrum of uses of the different trees but that they differ between the sources. The details below should thus be seen as non-conclusive examples. Different sources do furthermore, to an extent, include different species as sacred. The table below is a compilation of the species that have been observed and mentioned by respondents in this study in addition to the Navagraha and Nakshatra-included species.
Adapted from Chandrakanth et al. 1990; Neginhal 2006; Krishen 2006; Anon Botanical Local name English Associa- Value, meaning, use name name ted star Strychnos Kanjihemushti, Strychnine Ashwini Source of the alkaloids strychnine and nux-vomica Manjira, tree, Poison brucine (highly poisonous). Used in Hemmushti, nut, Quaker herbal medicine but is no longer used in Ittongi, Buttonswith ‘modern’ medicine. Kasarkayi Phyllanthus Amla Indian Bharani Edible fruits, often pickled. Medicinal emblica gooseberry properties, including possible anti- cancer. Ficus See p. 76 See p. 76 Krithika See p. 76 racemosa Syzygium Nerale Jamun, Rohini Associated with the god Rama. Berries cumini Jambul, are ‘fruits of the gods’. Edible. The tree Java plum has medicinal properties; antioxidant, antimicrobial. Acacia See p. 77, 78 See p. 77, Mrigashira See p. 77, 78 catechu 78 Piper Hippali Long Ardraa Seeds used for seasoning. Used in longum pepper, ayurveda as a longevity enhancer. Indian long pepper Bambusa Bedru Giant Punarvasu Used for food. Medicinal properties. arundi- thorny, Wood used for scaffolding etc. naceae Thorny bamboo Ficus See p. 76, 78 See p. 76, Pushya See p. 76, 78 religiosa 78 Mesua Nagasampige Ceylon Ashlesha Cultivated for its form, foliage and ferrea ironwood, flowers. Medicinal properties. Indian rose chestnut Soymida Some Indian Maagha Fibers, tannin (for dyeing), medicinal febrifuga redwood, properties Indian mahogany Butea Muttagamara Flame of Hubba Medicine, ornamental mono- the Forest,
82 sperma Bastard Teak Ficus Besari, White- Uttara Biodiversity value: Pollination is infectoria Basarigoli, Fruited dependent on fig wasps. Juvvimara wavy leaf fig Tree Spondia Muthiga, Wild mango Hasta Seeds edible, used for pickles. Feed for pinnata Ambatte mara, mammals. Amate kai Aegle Belapatre, Bael, Chitta Fruits used for food and juice. Leaves marmelos Bilva, Bengal and shoots used for salad greens. Bilvapatre etc. quince, Supports butterflies. Medicinal Wood apple properties. Used in religious rituals. Associated with Shiva. The trifoliate leaves symbolizes Shiva’s trident. Used in Nepal as protection against the social stigma of being widows. Girls are married to the fruit. As long as the fruit does not crack the girl can not become widowed. Terminalia Nirmatti Arjun, Swaathi All parts of the tree hold medicinal arjuna Arjun tree values. Used in ayurveda against heart problems and more. In mythology said to be Sita’s favourite tree. Flacourtia Attak, Hennu Mountain Vishakha Ornamental flowers. montana sampige Sweet Thorn Mimusops Ranjal Spanish Anuradha Financially valuable timber. Edible elengi cherry, fruits. The tree is used in ayurveda Medlar, against a wide range of disorders. Bullet wood Flowers ornamental and fragrant, offered in temples and shrines. The tree is in mythology said to put forth blossoms when sprinkled with nectar from the mouth of lovely women. Pinus Saraladevadaru Chir pine, Jeshta Used as protection against mosquitoes. longifolia/P Himalayan The turpentine obtained from the resin inus longleaf is antiseptic, diuretic, rebefacient and roxburghii pine vermifuge. Used against for example kidney and bladder complaints as well as against rheumatic affections. Canarium Nalla Black Moola Medicinal plant. Resin used against strictum rojanamu dammar, skin diseases, rheumatoid arthritis, Doopa fever cough, epilepsy and asthma Bedisu, Bettha, Rattan Palm Poorva- Used for making furniture, baskets, Calamus Dodda bettha, shada tables etc. rotang/ Habbe, Calamus Nagabetta etc. roxburghii Artocarpus Halasina Jackfruit Uttara Used for food, cultivated in India since
83 heterophyll hannu shada 3000 to 6000 years ago. Wood can be us used for furniture. Supports the Black Pepper vine. Calotropis See p. 76 See p. 76 Shravana See p. 76 gigantea Acacia See p. 76 See p. 76 Dhanishta See p. 76 ferruginea Antho- Kadam Kadam Shatha- Frequently mentioned in Hindi cephalus bhisha mythology. The child of Shiva and chinensis Parvati was named Kadam. Considered (syn. the Tree of Buddhism, is in mythology Neolamarki thought to reunite separated lovers. a cadamba) Used in festivals, for example the harvest festival Karam-Kadamba. Ecological significance: Food plant for butterfly caterpillars; flowers attract pollinators. Fruits edible for humans. Leaves are fed to cattle. Medicinal properties, for example are leaves used against diabetes.
Azadi- Bevu Neem Poorva- Widely used for medicinal purposes rachta bhadra indica Mangifera Mavina mara Mango Uttara- Domesticated 4000 years ago. The indica bhadra national fruit of India. Used for food. Leaves used in festivals and ceremonies. Medicinal properties; mangiferin is extracted from leaves and has exceptionally strong antioxidant capacity. Also used in ayurveda to clear digestion and acidity. Madhuca Mahwa, Indian Revathi Its delicious and nutritious flowers latifolia/ Mahua Butter Tree make it one of the most important of Madhuca (several the Indian forest trees. Medicinal latifolia languages); properties: bark used to cure leprosy Ippe, Hippe and heal wounds; flowers relieve (Kannada) coughs, biliousness and heart trouble; fruits are used against blood diseases etc.
84 Table 5: Sacred trees, other
Literature browsing on the uses of the sacred species has shown that there is often a wide spectrum of uses of the different trees but that they differ between the sources. The details below should thus be seen as non-conclusive examples. Different sources do furthermore, to an extent, include different species as sacred. The table below is a compilation of the species that have been observed and mentioned by respondents in this study in addition to the Navagraha and Nakshatra-included species.
Adapted from K9, K18, Neginhal 2006; Anon
Botanical name Local name English Associated Value, meaning, use (Kannada name/ star/planet unless otherwise Common stated) name Saraca asoca Achenge, Ashoka tree ? Bark and flowers used in Akshth, Ashanke ayurvedic medicine. Used as painkilling, for skin complexion enhancement, for removing worms, and for stopping bleeding. Ficus benghalensis Alada mara, vata Banyan tree, ? Shelters temples or (Kannada) Bengal fig, worshipped. Shelter for nyagrodha Indian fig travelers. Seeds eaten by (Sanskrit) birds and mammals. Melia azadirachta Bevu Neem ? Long history of medicinal use. All parts of the tree are used. Known as ‘Nature’s Drugstore’. May have malaria prevention effects. Also used for pest control. Shoots and flowers used as food. Juice drunken in association with festivals. The European Patent Office acknowledged in a patent court case in 2005 the 2000 years practice and denied a patent application on an anti-fungal product derived from Neem. Ocimum Tulsi Holy Basil ? Herbal medicine known for tenuiflorum its healing powers. Millettia Pinnata Honge Indian Beech, ? Medicinal plant also used (syn. Pongamia Pongam for biofuel; windbreaking; Pinata) ropes; and as compost for nutrient-demanding plants. Albizia lebbeck Bage, Hombage Siris tree, ? Medicinal, wood Lebbeck,
85 Flea Tree, Koko Balsamodendron ? Hill mango ? ? caudatum Bauhinia purpurea Devakanchan Hong Kong ? Medicinal Orchid tree Bauhinia racemosa Aapta Bidi Leaf ? Medicinal, used against Tree malaria, dysentery and diarrhea; leaves used for making bidis (thin cigarettes) Bomban ceiba ? ? ? ? Borassus flabellifer Olegari, Asian ? Food, beverages, furniture, Taalegari Palmyra building materials, palm, Toddy handicrafts Palm, Sugar Palm Calophyllum Honne Ballnut ? Flowers ornamental, wood inophyllum used in construction and boatbuilding. Nuts used for hair grease. Caryota urens Bayne, Bagani, Toddy palm, ? Syrup fermented into toddy Baini Wine palm, or processed into a Jaggery palm granular sugar, ‘jaggery’ Cassia fistula Kakke Golden ? Ornamental, medicinal. shower tree Used for millennia Cochlospermum Arasina buruga Buttercup ? The cotton that the seeds religiosum Tree, Yellow are surrounded in is said to Silk Cotton induce sleep when stuffed Tree in pillows. Also ornamental and used in medicine Cordia myna ? ? ? ? Corypha Sritale Talipot palm ? One of the larges palms in umbraculifera the world. Leaves used for thatching and previously for manuscripts. Sap used to make palm wine Crateva magna Bilipatri, Nervala ? ? Medicinal Diospyros Holitupare Gaub, Indian ? Medicinal. Bark, leaves, malabarica persimmon flowers and fruits are used Drypetes roxburghii Amani Putranjiva, ? Barks, leaves, fruits used (syn. Putranjiva Putranjiva Lucky Bean for medicine roxburghii, Nageia Tree putranjiva) Elaeocarpus Dandale mara, Rudrak ? ? tuberculatus Kadambola, Kunge mara Emblica officinalis/ Nellikkai Amla, Indian ? Medicine, food. Eaten raw Phyllanthus gooseberry or cooked in dishes
86 emblica Encoercaria ? ? ? ? agallocha Ficus amplissima Bilibasuri, Bat tree ? ? (Syn. Ficus tseila) Bilibasari mara Ficus tsahela ? ? ? ? Ficus microcarpa Peeladamara Laurel Fig, ? ? Indian Laurel, Curtain Fig, Hill’s Weeping Fig Lawsonia inermis Madarangi Henna ? Henna for dyeing skin, hair, fingernails, leather and wool Limonia acidissima Belavu, Belada Wood apple ? Medicinal. Rind of fruit Hannu, Byalada used as bowls, bark Hannu/Bael produces edible gum (common name but unknown which language) Mammea suriga Surige Mara, Surangi ? Cultivated in Western Wundi, Punay, Ghats for its flowers Suringi Mesua ferrea See p. 79 Ceylon ? ironwood, Indian rose chestnut Michelia champaca Sampige Champak, ? Worshipping in temples, Golden used in hair as beauty Champak, ornament and natural Joy Perfume perfume. Ornamental Tree Nyctanthes arbor- Parijata Night- ? Medicinal, ornamental tristis flowering Jasmine
Ochna obtusata Ramatana Ramdhan ? Medicinal, ornamental (syn. Ochna champaka Champa obtusata) Santalum album Agarugandha, Indian ? Fragrant wood, used for Bavanna, sandalwood fine woodworking or Bhadrasri, essential oil. Medicinal Chandala Stereospermum Padiri ? ? Flowers used for puja suaveolens Streblus asper Mitala Siamese ? Medicinal. Has been used rough bush, as early toothbrushes, Khoi, hence the nickname Toothbrush Toothbrush tree
87 tree Strychnos Chilladabeeja, Clearing nut ? Can be ground and used as potatorum Chilu tree, Water a coagulant or to purify Purifying water Fruit Tabernaemontana Uppilu Nag Kuda ? Medicinal alternifolia (Common name) Tamarindus indica Hunase Tamarind ? Edible fruit pulp used for example fresh, in dishes, for sweets or for pickles. Also used as medicinal pant for a wide variety of diseases or problems Terminalia bellirica Behara, Beleric, ? Medicinal. Antimicrobial Shanti Mara Bastard properties myrobalan Terminalia chebula Alalekaayi Black ? Medicinal. Laxative, myrobalan, antioxidant Chebulic myrobalan Tarenna asiatica Kumngida, Asiatic ? Medicinal uses, timber Kalgorvi Tarenna wood Ziziphus mauritiana Ber (Hindi) Jujube, ? Fruits eaten or used in Chinese beverages. Rich in vitamin apple C. Timber hard and strong, used to line wells, make legs for bedsteads and agricultural implements.
88 Appendix 5. Governance structures
Table 1: Official political governance structure
Governance structure and governing bodies from national to Bangalore city level. Adapted from Sudhira, Ramachandra, and Subrahmanya 2007; BBMP 2011; Bangalore Development Authority; Anon; Anon 1963.
Governing body Tasks/responsibilities Linked to Worth noting President Appoints Governor for each State Central Executive body. Aids and State government Little direct influence. government advices the President. Council of ministers, headed by Prime Minister Governor Executive power of the State Central government State government Laws and management of Up: Legislative Compartmentalized, Karnataka state Assembly corrupt, inefficient. Down: BBMP Appointed Administrator and Commissioner that ran BBMP from its creation until 2010. Legislative The Karnataka Forest Act Council of the Assembly from 1963 sets the legislative Ministers of the state framework for the usage of are responsible trees and tree products in the towards the state, as well as defines the Legislative Assembly. powers. Parastatal Planning and Development Upwards: State As below. In addition: bodies: Agency, Bangalore government, 14 members, all are key Bangalore metropolitan zone. Plan, Karnataka Town and members of the Development regulate, monitor and Planning Act. Authority or other Authority (BDA) facilitate infrastructural Parallel: the other development-related projects and urban parastatal bodies and bodies. development. the government's Issue directions to other urban development authorities regarding plan. All are parts of development. the BDA. Parastatal bodies BWSSB: Drinking- and State government All operate in own (other): sewerage water. BDA geographical areas, Bangalore Wat er Others: law and order, energy difficulties in and Sewerage etc. coordinating activities Supply Board and correlate (BWSSB), information. Ineffective Bangalore city development electric company planning. No elected etc. representatives.
89 BBMP (Bruhat Responsible for Bangalore Upwards: State Elections to city council Bangalore and outlying areas since government, every five years. Mayor Mahanagara 2006. parastatal bodies and deputy Mayor Palike) Each ward has one elected controlled by the once/year. First election representative (corporator) government was not until last year. that together make up the city Down: the people, BBMP need approval council, which runs the linked to BBMP by from BDA to plan, BBMP. the corporators decide and administer the city (illegal). Forest Maintaining ecological Mayor of Bangalore Forest conservators do department of balance: plant saplings neither meet with each BBMP other nor other political representatives as obliged to.
Table 2: Example of religious governance structure
The religious governance structure, using the Muslim focus site as the example, is displayed as a comparison to the official political governance structure.
Governance structure connected to the Muslim focus site. Sources: Key informant s FS7, FS8, K5; Anon Religious governing Duties/Actions/Powers Appointed Source of body/agent, Muslim by legitimacy site Karnataka state The Board appoints mutawallies Nominated Wakf Act 1995, a WAKF-board (caretakers) and managing committees to and Central Act. the Wakf institutions from time to time elected 27,548 Wakfs are after election. The Board is a party in members. registered with cases before the Wakf Tribunal, Civil the Board Courts & High Court Bangalore district Owns area after private donation. WAKF-board/ Dargah Administers orders by State Board and graveyard (“WAKF institutions”) managing committee Manager on-site Surveying maintenance and burials WAKF- board
90 Appendix 6. Surveys and responses to survey questions with pre-stated alternatives
Table one displays the questionnaire that was used on the Hindu focus sites. Note that it is an example, as the questionnaire had details on it altered, such as the visitors’ activities on the site, in order to make it more relevant to the different sites it was used on.
Table 1: Survey questionnaire
We are Anil Derick and Maria Schewenius. Maria is from Bangalore University in Sweden and is doing her master thesis research here in Bangalore. This survey will be used for information in an academic study only. All answers will be treated anonymously.
1. I am… a) M b) F
2. Age? A) Child b) Youth c) Middle age d) Old age
3. Occupation?
4. Previous occupation?
5. What is your religious belief? a) Hindu b) Muslim (other) c) Sufi d) Christian e) Buddhist
6. Where do you live? Ward______
7. Are you born in Bangalore? Yes No
7.1 If not, how long have you lived in Bangalore? a) -1 year b) 1 year or more c) 5 years or more d) 10 years or more
8. How long ago did you first come to this site? a) 10 years or more b) 5 years or more c) 1 year or more d) -1 year e) first time
9. How often do you visit this site? a) Every day b) Every week (one or several times) c) One or a few times a month d) One or a few times a year e) Less f) Live here
91
10. Why have you come to this site today? a) Make a wish b) Pray for problem relief c) For good luck d) For good health
e) Blessing of yourself/object f) Special day/holiday
g) Marriage or other family occasion h) Tradition/habit i) Other (what?)
11. Which areas on this site do you spend time at?
12. What do you do during the visits? Several options can be selected.
12.1 Hindu: a) Pray b) Circumambulate trees c) Circumambulate stones d) Circumambulate other symbols e) Receive blessing from priest
f) Tie a thread around a tree g) Offer puja (How?) h) Sprinkle milk (abhisheka) i) Shave head (tonsure) j) Socialize (outside/inside?)
k) Other? What? Does it involve the trees?
13. What trees are here on this site? a) Ficus religiosa (Jupiter) b) Neem c) Peepal d) Coconut palm tree
e) Acacia ferruginea (Banni tree/Saturn) f) Grass g) Other. Please specify:
14. Are there any trees that have special value to you? Which?
15. How can the trees affect your visit? 16. Do you also visit other religious sites?
16.1 If yes, what type of site is it? a) Temple/church/masjids/monastery b) Burial ground c) Shrine
d) School e) Other (what?)
92
16.2 What do you do (on that other site) during the visit?
16.3 What trees are there? a) Ficus religiosa (Jupiter) b) Neem c) Peepal d) Coconut palm tree
e) Acacia Ferruginea (Banni tree/Saturn) f) Grass g) Other. Please specify:
16.4 How can they affect your visit?
17. What is the meaning of the trees on this site, where we are now?
18. What would it mean if the trees here were removed?
18.1 How would you be affected?
19. What can you do to affect how this site looks and is used?
20. Who do you think can decide what happens with this area?
a) Central Government b) State Government c) BBMP d) The priest
e) Temple committee f) Temple visitors g) Land owner. Please specify:
That’s it. Finally, a big thank you for your participation.
93 Table 2: Responses to questions with pre-stated alternatives
Table two displays the survey responses to the questions with pre-stated response alternatives in addition to the tables displayed in the text.
X-axis: the Hindu site 1 Hindu site 2 Buddhist Dargah, Christian Focus sites monastery graveyard church Y-axis: The (Muslim) survey questions 1. I am.. Male: 14 18 9 16 12 Female: 6 2 11 4 8 2. Age? Child: 1 Child: 1 Child: 2 Child: 2 Child: 2 Youth: 10 Youth: 8 Youth: 10 Youth: 9 Youth: 12 Middle Middle Middle Middle Middle age: 5 age: 8 age: 6 age: 6 age: 6 Old age: 1 Old age: 4 Old age: 4 Old age: 4 Old age: 3 5. What is Hindu: 20 Hindu: 20 Hindu: 2 Hindu: 1 your religious Buddhist: Muslim: belief? 17 18 a) Hindu Undefined: Sufi: 1 b) Muslim 1 c) Sufi (Muslim) d) Christian e) Buddhist f) Other 9. How often a) 10 a) 11 a) 9 a) 7 a) 10 do you visit b) 3 b) 6 b) 9 b) 5 b) 5 this site? c) 0 c) 1 c) 0 c) 1 c) 5 a) Every day d) 3 d) 2 d) 0 d) 4 d) 0 b) Every e) 4 e) 0 e) 2 e) 3 e) 0 week c) Monthly d) Yearly e) Less 16. Do you Yes: 19 Yes: 20 Yes: 12 Yes: 17 Yes: 17 also visit No: 1 No: 0 No: 7 No: 3 No: 3 other religious sites? 16.1 What a) 17 a) 20 a) 10 a) 15 a) 12 type of site is b) 7 b) 0 b) 3 b) 12 b) 1 it? c) 4 c) 0 c) 1 c) 5 c) 9 a) Temple d) 2 d) 0 d) 3 d) 1 d) 2 b) Burial e) 12 e) 11 e) 5 e) 3 e) 3 ground Pilgrim Pilgrim Temples, Temple: 1 Pilgrim places c) Shrine places sites: 9 churches, Church: 1 d) School outside of Churches: 2 mosques Mosque: 1 e) Other, Bangalore and
94 definition monas- teries: 2 Meditation centre: 1 Forts, hospitals (Buddhist): 1 Pilgrim sites: 3
95