Making the Peripheral “Region”
Transcript of Making the Peripheral “Region”
![Page 1: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
IGU COMLAND Meeting and Field Trip, Slovenia June, 23rd – 27th, 2016
Atrium of the Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (address: Novi trg 2).
Making the Peripheral “Region” - From a Case of Nagarahole National Park
Koichi KIMOTO, Ph.D.
Kwansei Gakuin University, Nishinomiya, JAPAN
00
FMaRG ReGFF
![Page 2: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Field Work FMaRG ReGFF
01
Field (1993-): India (Karnataka, Rajasthan, Assam), China (North-east), Russia (Far-east), Scotland, Romania, Indonesia, Kenya Project (2009-) : # LUCC scheme (SLUAS project 2009-13) – Future Earth (1) Forest Management as Regional Governance (FMaRG) 2010-12 (2) Regional Governance of Forest Fringe (ReGFF) 2013-16
“Regional Governance”
![Page 3: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
02
Declamation to be premised (for consideration)
FMaRG ReGFF
Damaged forest
(British period and also after the independence)
Joint Forest Management
(JFM)
Bio-diversity Hot spot
(PAs)
Re-generation Conservation
Forest Cover (All India) (%) Early 19c - - - - - 40 % Early 20c - - - - - 20 % 1980’s - - - - - - - 10 % 2001 - - - - - - - - 20.6 %
Cf. 2001 - - - -19.96 % (Karnataka)
![Page 4: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Bengal records highest increase in forest cover, says survey
Of the 5,871 sq km increase in the forest cover of India West Bengal accounts for nearly 64 per cent of this rise, reveals the latest report of the Forest Survey of India.
A study conducted by the Forest Survey of India that was recently published, points out that West Bengal’s forest cover has increased by 3,810 sq km, which is followed by Odisha where the increase has been 1,444 sq km and Kerala with about 622 sq km.
Commenting on the increase in the forest cover in West Bengal, State principal chief conservator of forest Azam Zaidi told The Hindu that along with other steps the State’s joint forest management, which involves the participation of the local people, is one of the reasons for the increase.
“Increase in the forest cover of the State is mainly due to coppice growth (dense growth of small trees) and afforestation inside the forests, growth of commercial plantations and shady trees in tea gardens,” the FSI report states. (The Hindu 15th Feb. 2015)
http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/kolkata/bengal-records-highest-increase-in-forest-cover-says-survey/article6897267.ece
Evidence
03
FMaRG ReGFF
![Page 5: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Depletion Interestingly, the States from the Northeast like Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura and Manipur, whose forest cover comprises over 75 per cent of the State’s area, have shown a decrease in forest cover. “The current assessment shows a decrease of forest cover to the extent of 627 sq km in the region. The main reason for this decrease is attributed to the biotic pressure and shifting cultivation in the region,” the report states.
… continued
04
FMaRG ReGFF
![Page 6: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Today’s topic ? FMaRG ReGFF
05
What has happened in the process of this “recovery”? Where it has happened? Who were joined in it? What happen in the de-forested area around “forest”?
Af-forestation
De-forestation
De-gradation / conservation
![Page 7: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Area Number
(forest cover (%))
De-forestation
Decreasing wildlife Elephant (as a symbol) Cf. biodiversity
indicator
Notice (initial) Solution
Re-frame work
06
①De-gradation
②Enclosing
③Conflict Competition
Desertification Boarder issues Human-Animal Conflict (HAC), HEC People-G., G.-G., H-H
FMaRG ReGFF
Af-forestation
Conservation
participatory
![Page 8: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Method / Methodology FMaRG ReGFF
07
Secondary data; census, maps, satellite image, etc.
Primary data; field work (village-level survey, narrative approach)
*Mysore
*Bangalore
Nagarhole National Park (1983) (Rajiv Gandhi NP) (1988) area:643.39km2 altitude:700 - 960m Project Tiger reserve (1999), World Heritage (2012)
![Page 9: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
De-forestation (1930 – 2000) Hunsur & H.D. Kote taluk
Total area of the Taluks – 2,486.81 Km2
FMaRG ReGFF
08
![Page 10: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
around Nagarhole National Park FMaRG ReGFF
09
Tea Coffee
East: Semi-arid region
West: Plantation
![Page 11: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Issues
Degradation Desertification
Visible
In-visible
Physical
Social
ground water (level), soil degradation (erosion), Planting (eucalyptus)
FMaRG ReGFF
10
Quality of Forest
Enclosing
Setting Boarders (National Park / Sanctuary, Plantation) Land categories (Wasteland, “forest”)
Forest as a category
CC*
Human-Animal Conflict (HAC), HEC People-G., G.-G., H-H
* Conflict/Competition
Forest related issues
![Page 12: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
FMaRG ReGFF
11
Degradation Desertification ground water (level), soil degradation (erosion), Planting (eucalyptus)
Quality of Forest
![Page 13: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
FMaRG ReGFF
12
Degradation Planting (eucalyptus), fulfill the wasteland in village
Quality of Forest
![Page 14: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Enclosing Setting Boarders (National Park / Sanctuary, Plantation)
Forest as a category
FMaRG ReGFF
13
![Page 15: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
FD
RD
Forest (RF) De-forested area
b a
• (a) De-forested pressure from outside encouraged by Revenue Department (RD)
• (b) Re-settlement & Re-location (R&R) schemed by Forest Department (FD)
• Fix the boundary of “Forest”
• Deforestation (vegetation) is promoted by the change of category of forest
Deforestation by outside and inside pressure FMaRG ReGFF
14
![Page 16: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Diagram of making forest (PAs) fringe area FMaRG ReGFF
15
( 1 )
( 2 )
( 3 )
( 4 )
Long time before ?
19th century (timber demand) (labor for plantation)
After independence (social welfare) (land demand)
After 1990’s (land demand) (re-habitation)
![Page 17: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Ideal and actual condition (PAs) FMaRG ReGFF
16
R E
M
T
Forest Region
Forest +
Forest related area
![Page 18: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
FMaRG ReGFF
17
CC* Human-Animal Conflict (HAC), HEC People-G., G.-G., H-H
* Conflict/Competition
Forest related issues
![Page 19: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Who lives in this area (peripheral region)? FMaRG ReGFF
18
Forest
Protected/Managed as a sanctuary Un-planning/Un-managed/diversity
a
d
c b
e
Governance
from inside (a) ie Tribal from urban region (b) resident (investor) from sub-urban region (c) peasant farmer, from outside of district (d) rich farmer from outside of state (e) farmer
# Forest Sprawl
New comer’s area (not traditional dweller)
![Page 20: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Human and Elephant Conflict (HEC) FMaRG ReGFF
19
Source: Gubbi(2012)
NPs is not suitable for Elephant and human For what purpose? Tourism? Logistic? (road construction work, regulation) Jail (for elephants) or Fortress (for human) close, corridor, vegetation
Human – Human conflict diversity of residents (expense for protecting Elephant) How to share? How to make a governance ?
![Page 21: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Re-habilitation colony for ST FMaRG ReGFF
20
![Page 22: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
# Remarks 1. This periphery region is new not as physically, but
as socially.
2. This region has special feature like a periphery of city.
3. In this region, it is difficult to set the joint-ness between Government and Regional Governance.
Remarks FMaRG ReGFF
21
![Page 23: Making the Peripheral “Region”](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022021212/62067ee565c6f91810534883/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
FMaRG ReGFF
22
Thanking you