PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE GOVERNANCE

OF NATURAL RESOURCE COMMONS IN

MANDLA DISTRICT, MADHYA PRADESH

DOCUMENTATION OF BEST PRACTICE

June 2014

Researched and Documented by: Kavitha Kunhi Kannan

OneWorld Foundation India

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 3

Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 5

Background .................................................................................................................................................. 5

Objective ...................................................................................................................................................... 7

Programme Design ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Key Stakeholders ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Work Flow ................................................................................................................................................ 9

Financial Resources ............................................................................................................................... 12

Impact ......................................................................................................................................................... 13

Challenges in Implementation .............................................................................................................. 14

Potential for Replication ......................................................................................................................... 15

Sustainability ............................................................................................................................................ 16

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 17

References .................................................................................................................................................. 17

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

FES Foundation for Ecological Security

EPCO Environmental Planning and Coordination Organisation

INR Indian Rupee

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Foundation for Ecological Security (FES), a non-profit that works on ecological concerns

in India, began work in Mandla district of Madhya Pradesh to introduce a sustainable

pattern of livelihoods and conservation. This was achieved through a model that

supports strong community-based institution building at the village level, created for

the purpose of efficiently governing and regulating the use of commons.

For the execution of the livelihoods-cum-conservation agenda, planning and

implementation has been decentralised to members of the community through the

institution referred to as Natural Resource Management Committees - these are placed

at the forefront as nodal implementing agencies while FES provides technical and

financial assistance for strengthening the capacity of these institutions. Eighty villages in

two blocks of Mandla district have implemented this programme successfully. The case

study highlights the institution building carried out thereof and how these institutions

have been instrumental in reinforcing traditional sustainable practices and enhancing

community natural resource management.

Communities have used the natural resource accounting tool to diversify agricultural

activities and implement simple measures such as stone bunding and agroforestry to

counter problems of soil erosion and retention of soil moisture. In consideration of the

topography and climate of the area, having thin layer of soil and being prone to water

stresses in catchment areas, climate hardy crops such as millets are being explored.

Alternative crops such as ragi that were dropped in favour of more popular crops like

paddy are also being reintroduced.

The goal of the programme, therefore, has been to bind the members of the village into a

single unit to own and promote sustainable use of commons and to collectively plan for

livelihoods activities in line with the principles that were devised to govern natural

resources.

METHODOLOGY

The Knowledge and Research Team at OneWorld conducted primary research in the

preparation of this case study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the

main stakeholders. The District Team Leader of FES and staff in charge of impact and

evaluation study in Mandla district, Madhya Pradesh were interviewed. A group

stakeholder meeting, viz. with members of the Executive Committee of Payali Bahur,

was held in the village. Desk research was also carried out to support the background

and theoretical understanding of the case study.

BACKGROUND

The concept of ‘tragedy of the commons’ by the ecologist Garett Hardin hypothesises

that in the absence of an external agency, common pool of resources in a community will

stand to be overexploited by the people. This has been challenged by the work of Nobel

Laureate Elinor Ostrom whose rich empirical work revealed that this hypothesis does

not hold true in cases where a fixed set of principles are actively enforced by the

community. Elinor Ostrom’s work enlists the following eight principles for the

governance of commons1 –

1. Define clear group boundaries.

2. Match rules governing use of common goods to local needs and conditions.

3. Ensure that those affected by the rules can participate in modifying the rules.

4. Make sure the rule-making rights of community members are respected by

outside authorities.

5. Develop a system, carried out by community members, for monitoring members’

behaviour.

6. Use graduated sanctions for rule violators.

7. Provide accessible, low-cost means for dispute resolution.

8. Build responsibility for governing the common resource in nested tiers from the

lowest level up to the entire interconnected system.

1 Ostrom, Elinor. ‘Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action’.

Cambridge University Press. 1990.

It was on the basis of Elinor Ostrom’s principles on governance of commons that

Foundation for Ecological Security (FES) decided to engender direct application of the

principles in Mandla district for the management of common property. A model to

anchor strong village-based institutions in decentralising planning and rule-making on

common-pool resources was, hence, envisaged.

FES works to develop a sustainable agenda at the grassroots level for ecological

conservation. This is with the clear understanding that ecological security is not a

distinct entity but a vital co-extension of the livelihoods need of the population. In 2006,

FES had piloted a project in western Madhya Pradesh for empowering rural

communities in the reclamation of revenue wastelands. Based on the lessons learnt in

this endeavour, FES embarked on a renewed programme of addressing the demand

on natural resources in Mandla with a focus on forests in 2010.

There was recognition of the fact that understanding the problem context and

engendering solutions requires the active participation and ownership on the part of the

villagers, especially in light of their vast knowledge bank on age-old traditional practices

that were tailored to suit individual and environmental needs. The efficient

management of commons infused with indigenous and theoretical knowledge for

greater environmental sustainability, therefore, became the harbinger for addressing the

ecological security of the region.

In Madhya Pradesh, FES identified two main blocks, Nivas and Bicchia, in Mandla

district for undertaking a livelihoods-cum-conservation programme. The district has an

undulating landscape of forest areas interspersed with agricultural lands, where the

forest provides biophysical security to the ecosystem. Owing to this landscape,

agricultural practices followed have traditionally been diverse. Further, the

demographic mainly consists of the Gond and Baiga tribes who are a mix of agrarians

and hunter-gatherers by profession, respectively. The relationship of tribal livelihoods

has been closely linked to forests for produce, fodder and fuel.

Villages such as Kusumi, Payali Bahur and Patha Devgaon have traditionally been

conserving forests, however, over the years a marked decrease in forest cover has been

witnessed in Mandla district. Degradation and fragmentation of the forests, especially in

the catchment areas, has made it less adaptable to climate change and left the ecosystem

vulnerable to soil erosion and encroachment. The nutrient flow between forest and

agricultural lands has also been affected in turn.

The growing demand for fuel wood and fodder has deteriorated the governance

mechanisms for common properties and affected livelihoods capacities. On the one

hand, hunter-gatherer tribes have to go deeper and farther into the forests to fulfil their

needs and on the other, farmers are not willing to go further upland as they are unfit for

crops such as paddy.

Moreover, there is a climate change danger in these parts as they are catchment areas

and can suffer from water stresses where the presence of forest cover becomes more

pertinent. Unchecked flow of water has affected the fertility of the soil and reduced the

soil moisture retention capacity in lowland agricultural fields.

S. No. Land-use Category Area in Hectares

1. Forests 593126

2. Land not available for agriculture 53342

3. Other fallow land excluding revenue wasteland 19703

4. Cultivable wasteland 19577

5. Revenue wasteland 60673

6. Net-sown area

• Area under single crop

• Area under double crop

282093

• 219055

• 68160

Total 965559

Table 1: Land use pattern in Mandla district, Madhya Pradesh

Source: District Planning and Statistical Office – District Statistical Handbook, 2006 and Melissa Orr. ‘A

Rapid Landscape Assessment on Environmental Vulnerability of Matiyari Watershed, Mandla District,

Madhya Pradesh’. Foundation for Ecological Security.

The unsustainable trend in the usage of commons produced a need to hark back to

traditional practices that accounted for ecological factors in the consumption of natural

resources and to revisit them with modern knowledge and simple technology. Natural

Resource Management Committees, formed in each village, were empowered to assess

the needs of the community and develop a strategy for addressing the mode of

cooperation for the use of natural resources, how the livelihoods approach can be

improved and, by extension, how it can become more environmentally sustainable in the

long term.

OBJECTIVE

The main objectives of the programme are:

To build and strengthen village-level community institutions for the efficient

management of commons

To empower rule-making and enforcement capacities of village-level institutions

in natural resource management

To promote diversified livelihoods activities

To encourage judicious use of natural resources

PROGRAMME DESIGN

KEY STAKEHOLDERS

Figure 1: Role of key stakeholders

Source: OneWorld Foundation India 2014

•Role: Mainly facilitates institution-building process; Guides implementation with specialised handholding; Provides financial resources through GIZ and EPCO; Acts as a liaison between below mentioned institutions.

•District level: District Team Leader; Cluster level: Project Officers handling 30-40 villages each - includes a multi-disciplinary team of social workers, engineers etc.; Village level: Field Associates, pool of experts such as hydrologist, ecologist and such others hired as per requirement.

Foundation for Ecological Security

•Role: Nodal implementing agency; Planning and execution; Creation and enforcement of bye-laws.

•It is an ad hoc committee created by gram sabhas under the provisions of the Panchayati Raj Act and is dissolved and re-elected like panchayats every two years.

Natural Resource Management Committee or Village Executive Committee

•Forest Department: Institutions such as JFM Committee strengthened jointly

•Agriculture Department: Supporting role in implementing farmer schemes

•Irrigation Department: Indirectly helps efforts in the management of water reservoirs in the area, reinvigorating redundant stop dams

•Block offices of MGNREGA and Tribal Department: Fulfills labour requirements and interventions on forest rights respectively

Government Departments in Supporting Role

WORK FLOW

The FES programme has been implemented in 80 villages of two main blocks of Mandla

district – Nivas and Bicchia blocks. A ground-up village institution model was adopted

in order to focus on common-pool resources. This decentralised model was chosen as

the ideal route for encompassing vital indigenous practices, and reviving them where

necessary, in obtaining the end goal of sustainable development for environmental

protection. Decentralisation generates greater ownership for the tasks undertaken and

more importantly, it brings higher accountability in the system. A platform for issues in

implementation and managing projects also becomes more readily available if there is a

decentralised institution at hand. Specific emphasis is laid on deriving livelihoods

solutions that require minimal capital investment and maintenance costs, with the

Natural Resource Management Committee as the implementing agency and FES as a

facilitator.

1. Creation of village-level institution: The first step is to create a robust village-level

institution that adopts the livelihoods-cum-conservation mandate. This is done

through the existing panchayati raj structure – the gram sabha is empowered to create

an ad hoc committee for special purposes and is, therefore, encouraged to elect one

in this case. The Natural Resource Management Committee (Prakritik Sansadhan

Prabandhan Samiti), also referred to as Village Executive Committee, is thus formed.

2. Creation of by-laws: This is the most important step in institution building and

implementation of the programme. The newly formed Village Executive Committee

has to democratically form a set of rules and regulations that will govern the use of

commons. All activities undertaken will be guided by these rules and regulations

and it will be collectively enforced with the agreement of stakeholders including

penalties for violations. The democratic and decentralised nature of the process

allows for these rules and regulations to be more easily accepted and enforced by

the community.

3. Preparation of annual work plan: The work plan is prepared by the Village Executive

Committee with the facilitation and support of FES. On the basis of these village

plans, FES forms a cumulative team level plan to guide overall future strategy.

4. Training and capacity building: Training is given on a monthly basis to all village

stakeholders. For long term sustainability, one person from the village is identified

by the Village Executive Committee to become a master trainer and attends FES

sessions at the district level. Based on the requirements of the project, assistance of

government departments are also sought in training sessions. For example, the

Department of Agriculture is approached for a convergence in training on improved

agricultural practices.

5. Review: All projects are periodically reviewed. Team coordination meetings are

conducted fortnightly or monthly by FES and review meetings are carried out on a

monthly basis at the village level. Based on the review, action plans are restrategised

and improved thereon.

Portfolio of activities

Diversification of agricultural activities is encouraged to bring about greater adaptability

to climate change. Traditionally, diversification has been followed by tribals owing to

the landscape but over the years this has given way to the growth of more commercial

crops. Also, while indigenous knowledge on forestry has been vast, know-how of

horticultural crop and hybrid varieties has been limited. Hence, there was a shift

towards encouraging agroforestry and horticulture to promote complex biodiversity

and expand the livelihood options of the farmer.

Similarly, dying breeds of plants that were once considered significant by the

indigenous population for nutrition and climate resilience are also being reintroduced.

To strengthen the ecosystem for these agricultural activities, simple measures for

tackling soil erosion, fertility and moisture retention measures were implemented.

With this model, the following portfolio of activities has been implemented in Nivas and

Bicchia blocks.

Natural resource accounting: Village Executive Committees are encouraged to

institutionalise the practice of natural resource accounting to have a clear

formulation of the common-pool resources and the livelihoods

activities/supplementary activities to be undertaken by individuals. This is an

important activity that determines the planning and execution stages of the

Committee and is done after a careful survey of existing traditional practices and

knowledge, and the adaptive capacities of livelihood activities.

Soil conservation measures: These measures were demonstrated to the village and

are done in tandem with below mentioned activities for retention of soil and soil

moisture.

Constructing stone exits: The unobstructed flow of water across cultivable lands

during rainfall results in massive soil erosion. To counter this, the simple

technique of stone exits was introduced – the construction of stone exits cost

approximately INR 350 for a single plot of land and MGNREGA workers were

hired for the same.

Agroforestry: This was introduced in places with thin soil layers and high slopes.

The planting of trees improves forest cover in the region. In addition to this, fruit-

bearing varieties in agroforestry have been mixed with timber and other varieties

for higher climate resilience. The main advantages of agroforestry are that –

o it is not very water intensive

o it helps in soil conservation measures

o it limits the ecological vulnerabilities of the region

o it promotes greater biodiversity, and

o it reduces carbon emissions and allows higher carbon sequestration.

Alternative crops: Millets have been introduced as a viable option, suitable to the

climate of the region – it does not require high amounts of water and can

withstand variations in temperature. Home-grown and medicinal plants such as

mahua, chirongee, harra and bahera are also being encouraged.

Supporting dying breeds of plants: Earlier wild fruits such as wild tubers were an

essential source of nutrition especially in extreme climactic situations. Although it

has not been very successful so far, attempts are being made to domesticate such

wild fruits. Similarly, ragi was a popular crop in Mandla before the advent of

hybrid variety of paddy and is now being reintroduced. It is expected that these

efforts will help villagers attain seed sovereignty as well.

Analysing environmental trends of the region: Data on monthly rainfall for 100 years

in Mandla was provided to FES by Environmental Planning and Coordination

Organisation (EPCO)2. On analysis, it was found that the variant in monthly

rainfall in the past 10 years has been exceptionally high; this is being supported

with data from FES rain gauge systems as well. An analysis of such information

helps FES in measuring the erratic nature of environmental trends and the

resulting impact on livelihoods in these regions.

2 EPCO was established by the Housing and Environment Department of the Government of

Madhya Pradesh in 1981 for handling environment-related matters.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES

FES receives grants for funding programmes at the village level. Eight villages in

Mandla are currently being run on a grant basis from GIZ3. The financial model with

approximate costs has been detailed in Table 2.

3 EPCO, Madhya Pradesh convened stakeholder meetings for parties interested in environmental

projects. EPCO has also formulated a State Action Plan that guides the environment agenda in

the state. As a liaison, it has helped NGOs and funding parties such as GIZ to carry this forward

and improve visibility of environment projects in Madhya Pradesh.

Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 (clockwise from top left): Members of the Village Executive Committee at Payali Bahur village;

Stone exits on agricultural land at Payali Bahod; By-laws prepared by Village Executive Committee

Source: OneWorld Foundation India 2014

The programmes are encouraged to be financed via the efforts of the Village Executive

Committee without any external support in the first instance. FES also attempts to create

opportunities for villagers to contribute in whatever way possible, whether in cash or in

kind. For example, seed reserves are created with pooled resources or pumps are bought

collectively and managed through a pay-per-use model.

However, where such funds are inadequate, the village passes a resolution and submits

a letter to FES requesting for a grant for community works. The expenditure is recorded

in a Utilisation Certificate after the completion of the project, verified by the Executive

Committee and then submitted to FES.

Programme Component Expenditure (in INR)

Project Management 3 lakhs

Soil moisture conservation and stone

bunding (more than 1000 acres of land)

8 lakhs

Agroforestry 3 lakhs

(12,000 per acre)

Pond restoration 2 lakhs

Agricultural interventions 1.5 lakhs

Training and capacity building 3.5 lakhs

Total Cost 21 lakhs

Table 2: Financial model

Source: OneWorld Foundation India 2014 and FES, Mandla district

IMPACT

A series of inter-connected changes have been observed since the implementation of the

programme. This has impacted both ecological conditions and the status of livelihoods

activities. Short-term achievements have been described here whereas long term

outcomes, as is the case for environmental measures, will take time to mature and

become visible.

1. Benefits of soil bunds/exits: This simple measure has turned out to be the most

beneficial to the beneficiaries.

a. Prevention of soil erosion: The construction of soil bunds/exits has

hugely helped in preventing soil erosion due to run-offs, which the

catchment areas of Mandla was prone to. As per beneficiary accounts, this

outcome was seen within a year of building stone exits.

b. Increased area of cultivation: Reduction in soil erosion and the

consequent soil conservation has led to a gradual increase in the area of

cultivation. A renewed growth of grass was noticed in uncultivated parts

of the land.

c. Increase in fodder: The increased growth of grass has, in turn, become

grazing land for the cattle owned by farmers, and they are now not

required to send them to forest areas.

d. Soil fertility: Rotting leaves and other natural debris that collect at stone

bunds add to the humus layer of the soil and increase the fertility of the

soil.

2. Outcomes of SRI intervention: This methodology has not only reduced material

investment but has also increased overall crop productivity; the programme has

recorded an almost 50% increase in productivity in some cases.

3. Alternative crops:

a. Millet crops have been a successful alternative for effectively utilising

fallow land and increasing the area of cultivation.

b. The benefits of agrohorticulture and bund plantation will be seen at a

later stage as they have a long gestation period but they are expected to

increase retention of soil moisture.

4. Outcome of the use of natural resource accounting: A culture of natural

resource management has effectively settled in to villages. While the portfolio of

livelihoods activities has enlarged, the judicious use of resources has come to be

understood as a necessary extension. For example, in Payali Bahur, a by-law

prevents the cutting down of mahua trees in recognition of the fact that they are a

good source of nutrients, especially in drought areas. These activities have,

therefore, helped in increasing forest cover and in reintroduction of highly useful

trees such as char and harra.

5. Increased forest cover: Agroforestry activities have added to the overall forest

area in two villages.

CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTATION The existing infrastructural facilities are considerably weak and results in people

having difficulty in understanding the ‘structure’ that is required in the interventions.

There is also a problem of encroachment of the commons to the advantage of the

wealthy and powerful, and to the detriment of the socially weak. To overcome this,

ardent negotiations are carried out with both parties and a settlement is arrived at such

that the commons equally benefit all. The timely enforcement of by-laws plays an

important role in ensuring this objective.

Similarly, sometimes in the management of commons there are conflicting claims of

forest territory between villages. A dialogic process is facilitated by FES but settlement

can be time-consuming.

This adds to the general problem of tenurial security as well. Demand for land is rising

by the day and forest lands or cultivable areas are known to be captured by mining and

industrial activities for non-forest activities. In such a predatory environment, it has

become more essential for villagers to claim their community forest rights and maintain

them. Institution-building and robust policymaking activities are essential, therefore, in

securing tenurial rights.

The current policy environment encourages resource-intensive practices such as

inorganic farming and genetically modified varieties. This may eventually lead to loss of

crop variety and seed sovereignty wherein farmers have to rely on an external agency

for the supply of seeds. Ragi cultivation, as described earlier, had almost completely

disappeared in this region with the advent of hybrid variety of paddy cultivation.

Besides the loss of variety and seed, reintroduction of these crops becomes a tedious

process.

POTENTIAL FOR REPLICATION

The most crucial requirement in the programme is the creation and empowerment of the

Village Executive Committee in the spirit of decentralisation. Replication of this project

will require an in-depth understanding of the community’s needs through regular

meetings amongst villagers. Building and strengthening community-run institutions is

key to the development of a long-term sustainable development agenda. It is also

important to nest village-level institutions in the existing structure for stronger

foundation and authority and to link activities with those of existing government

departments.

As in the case of FES programmes, environment conservation practices should be

considered in step with livelihoods initiatives. The diversity of livelihoods activities, in

particular, should be undertaken on the basis of ground-level experience and factors.

Baseline studies will inform the project inception, track the growth of the project and

will aid the formulation of long-term planning and strategy.

The contribution of FES has been strictly limited to facilitating the process and not

driving it in order to successfully sustain the community-driven model and rule-making

process. Democratically engendering solutions in a decentralised manner at the village

level and from the knowledge repository that has been traditionally passed down

through generations is key to building a portfolio of activities that match the ecological

situation of the region. Ensuring the application of these solutions is more easily carried

forward with the acceptance and participation of the community, giving it a stronger

foundation.

SUSTAINABILITY

The trajectory of the programme has been designed to evolve adequate authority and

decision-making powers in a decentralised community-run body and to retain the role

of an organization such as FES until such time as facilitation is found necessary. The

programme’s model has been successful in achieving this wherein handholding efforts

for village institutions are observed to be required only for a fixed term. After a period

of time, village institutions are able to initiate projects and sustain them without any

external assistance. The social sustainability quotient of the programme is, thus, quite

high as its beginnings and continuance are attributed to the participation of the

community and the strengthening of the institution run by the community. However, it

is important to address the abovementioned challenge of tenurial security that could

jeopardize this.

The democratic and cooperative nature of the institutions is expected to create a long-

standing platform for equity in the village societies. While this is a long-term objective,

the livelihoods-cum-conservation measures and more importantly, the rule-making

process, have to take this agenda forward gradually. From an environmental point of

view, the strengthening of by-laws, and its strict adherence and enforcement has helped

in increasing the forest cover. This increase could lead to the reclamation of wildlife in

these forests by providing more non-habitat areas for migratory animals, further

enriching the ecosystem of the area.

The present trend of seasonal and urban migration among younger generations has

been a concern. This trend leads to an abandonment or disdain for agricultural

occupation and might result in neglect for the overall environmental improvement that

the programme aims for. If the institutions deliver and are able to create sufficient

incentives, this can be avoided.

The financial model, on the other hand, has a dependence on FES for funds, however,

efforts are being made to convert the corpus of funds into revolving funds so that

Committees can undertake activities of their own initiative at a later stage. This will help

in raising the financial sustainability of the programme.

CONCLUSION

A community-driven approach with an emphasis on livelihoods has helped in

expanding the ecological portfolio in implementing villages and promoting the

cooperative use of commons. With the replication of this successful project where

communities are empowered to effect large-scale change in a decentralised manner, it

becomes essential that government policies also have a larger mandate to steer future

activities towards an environment-conscious scenario in various regions. The push for

resource-intensive activities that do not take into account environmental impact will

deter such a mandate, and must be revisited to encourage sustainable development.

Research was carried out by the OneWorld Foundation India (OWFI), Knowledge and Research team.

Documentation was created by Research Analyst, Kavitha Kunhi Kannan

For further information, please contact Rajiv Tikoo, Director, OWFI.

REFERENCES

Ostrom, Elinor. ‘Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective

Action’. Cambridge University Press. 1990.

SHT Mandla, Foundation for Ecological Security. ‘Eco-restoration | Sustainable

Livelihoods: Technical Interventions through Village Institutions in Niwas’. 2012.

Jay Walljasper. ‘Elinor Ostrom's 8 Principles for Managing A Commmons’. On the

Commons Magazine. Web. 27 May 2014.

http://onthecommons.org/magazine/elinor-ostroms-8-principles-managing-

commmons#sthash.P7XszlaB.dpuf’

T. Chow and B. Weeden, ‘An Introduction to Ostrom’s Eight Principles for Sustainable

Governance of Common-Pool Resources as a Possible Framework for Sustainable

Governance of Space’. Secure World Foundation. Web. 27 May 2014.

http://swfound.org/media/61531/ISUSymposium2012Paper_TChowBWeeden.pdf

Melissa Orr. ‘A Rapid Landscape Assessment on Environmental Vulnerability of

Matiyari Watershed, Mandla District, Madhya Pradesh’. Foundation for Ecological

Security. 2008. Web. 27 May 2014.

http://fes.org.in/studies/9.pdf