Assessment of common property resources utilization and management in valley and hill regions of Manipur, India

International Journal of Economics and Management Studies

© 2019 by SSRG - IJEMS Journal

Volume 6 Issue 10

Year of Publication : 2019

Authors : Janee Yumlembam, Y. Chakrabarty Singh, Dibakar Naik

10.14445/23939125/IJEMS-V6I10P114

How to Cite?

Janee Yumlembam, Y. Chakrabarty Singh, Dibakar Naik, "Assessment of common property resources utilization and management in valley and hill regions of Manipur, India," SSRG International Journal of Economics and Management Studies, vol. 6,  no. 10, pp. 103-111, 2019. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23939125/IJEMS-V6I10P114

Abstract:

Management of common property resources (CPRs) has long been an important issue for policy analyst. The importance of study is much to do with the fact that agriculture goes hand in hand with these resources. CPRs such as canal provide irrigation water in many villages in the country. Common property land resources are utilized for agricultural purposes, livestock rearing, etc. This article, based on empirical study in hill and valley regions underlines the nature, degree of CPRs uses, and existing mode of management of the resources in northeast Indian state Manipur. And thereby assessed the potential measures for proper management of the resource. CPRs considered in the study include pond, forest, agricultural land and lake the uses of which are de-facto and de-jure in nature. These have been the source of food, fodder and fuel to the extent of 80-100 per cent. Management system of CPRs in northeast India depends on certain factors such as the definition of CPRs itself viz., land owned collectively and land owned by the village chief. There were Participatory management- community based and Communal tenure- collective action of management in the villages of hill and valley regions respectively. However there were accounts of no proper management of forest and lake resource. Here we have recommended Community based Participatory management of the forest resource and for the lake resource, formation of committee for collective action in which state government plays the role of a catalyst in mitigating the limits of effective voluntary collective action.

Keywords:

Common property resources, Collective action, Participatory management, Conservation and Sustainability

References:

[1] Adhikari, B. (2001). Property rights and natural resources: impact of common property institutions on community-based resource management. Ph. D thesis submitted to Department of Environment, The University of York Heslington, York, YO10 5DD United Kingdom.
[2] Andersen, K. E (2011). Communal tenure and the governance of common property resources in Asia, Land Tenure Working Paper 20, Food And Agriculture Organization Of The United Nations.pp 1-24.
[3] Bamberg, S.; Rees, J., Seebauer, S (2015). Collective climate action: Determinants of participation intention in community-based pro-environmental initiatives. Journal Environmental Psychology, 43: 155–165.
[4] Bandura, A. (1977). A Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change, Psychological Review, 84: 191- 215.
[5] Bon, E. (2000). Common property resources two case studies. Economic and Political Weekly, 35 (28/29): 2569-2573. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4409507
[6] Child, B. (2009). Recent innovations in conservation. In Suich, H., Child, B., and Spenceley A (Eds.), Evolution and innovation in wildlife conservation: parks and game ranches to transfrontier conservation areas, pp. 277- 288. London: Earthscan.
[7] Chow, T and Weeden, B. (2012).An Introduction to Ostrom‟s Eight Principles for Sustainable Governance of Common-Pool Resources as a Possible Framework for Sustainable Governance of Space, pp. 1-4. Available at www.swfound.org
[8] Coad, L., Abernethy, K., Balmford, A., Manica, A., Airey L., & Gull, M.E.J (2010).Distribution and use of income from bushmeat in a rural village. Central Gabon Conservation Biology, 24:1510-1518
[9] Ganguly, J.B. (1987). “The Problem of Tribal Landlessness in Tripura,” in B. B. Dutta and M. N. Karna (eds). Op. cit: 221-233.
[10] GoI,(2008). District report Churachandpur, Ministry of Minority Affairs, Government of India. Omeo Kumar Das Institute of Social Change and Development: Guwahati VIP Road, Upper Hengerabari, Guwahati 781036
[11] GoI.(1999). Common property resources in India, NSS 54th round -January 1998 June 1998.National Sample Survey Organisation Department of Statistics and Programme Implementation Government of India.http://mospi.nic.in /sites/default/files/publication_reports/452_final.pdf
[12] Grossman, D., and Holden, P. (2009). Towards transformation: contractual National Parks in South Africa. In: Suich H, Child B, Spenceley A (Eds.), Evolution and innovation in wildlife conservation: parks and game ranches to transfrontier conservation areas, 357 -372.
[13] Guerin, K. (2003). Property rights and environmental policy, a New Zealand perspective.New Zealand Treasury Working Paper 03/02, Wellington. New Zealand. http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2003/03- 02/twp03-
[14] Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243-1248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243
[15] Heltberg, R (2018). Property rights and natural resource management in developing countries, Journal of Economic Surveys, 16 (2), 9-26
[16] Joshi, N., Alexander, A.,A., & Acharya, S. (2014). De jure and De facto status of the commons: the case of two marginalized tribal villages in Madhya Pradesh, Research Gate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309193663
[17] Leverington F., Costa K.L., Courrau, J., Pavese, H., Nolte, C., Marr, M., Coad, L., Burgess, N., Bomhard, B., & Hockings, M. (2nd Edition). (2010). Management effectiveness evaluation in protected areas: a global study. Brisbane: University of Queensland.
[18] Murty, M. N (1994). Management of common property resources" limits to voluntary collective action, Environmental and Resource Economics, 4: 581-594.
[19] NCERT(2016).Land resources and agriculture. India people and economy, 40-59, National Council of Education Research and Training Publications, Sri Aurobindro Marg, New Delhi 110016. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/document/332234280/legy205-pdf
[20] Ostrom, E (1990). Governing the Commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge university press,
[21] Prabhat, D. (1994). Panchayet and people. In: The West Bengal Experience. Kolkata (Dasgupta, 2001: 3)
[22] Saha, S (2014). Common property resources, poverty and environmental degradation: a case study In West Bengal. Doctoral thesis, University of Burdwan, West Bengal.
[23] Sahoo, R., & Swain, M. (2013).Contribution of common property resources for sustainable rural livelihoods in Odisha: prospects and constraints. Journal of Rural Development, 32 (3), 245 – 261.
[24] Schlager, E and E. Ostrom 1992 “Property-rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis”. Land Economy 68(3) p.249-262
[25] Turnhout, E.; Bommel, S.V.; Aarts, N (2010). How participation creates citizens: Participatory governance as performative practice. Ecol. Soc. , 15: 299–305.
[26] Van Asselt, M. B. A., Mellors, J., Rijkens-Klomp, N., Greeuw, S.C.H., Molendijk, K.G.P., Beers, P.J., & Van Notten, P. (2001). Building blocks for participation in integrated assessment: a review of participatory methods. ICIS Working Paper I01–E003. ICIS, Maastricht, Netherlands.
[27] World Resources Institute (2005). The Wealth of the Poor: Managing ecosystems to fight poverty http://www.wri.org/publication/world-resources-2005-wealth-poor-managingecosystems-fight-poverty