Legislative Framework of Governance and Tribal Development: Status of Forest Land Allotment for STs and TFDs under the Forest Rights Act

Abstract

Democratic decentralization in the recent advancement dialogue emerged as a key instrument of administrative control with emphasizing people’s involvement in the decision-making processes, thus ensuring accountability and transparency in the execution of the development programmes. This article attempts to study the decentralization process, its elements, its conceptual and theoretical understanding under legislative frameworks of governance (i.e., evolution of Panchayati Raj Institutions under 73rd Constitutional Amendment and extension through the Panchayat Extension to Scheduled Areas Act). It is also based on the assumption that legislative frameworks of governance which delegate powers from top–bottom have widened the scope of local self-governance relating to the establishment, powers, functions and responsibilities of Panchayati Raj Institution. Hence, it is transferred from central to local government as a way to promote broader values of pluralistic participatory democracy, but towards forest resources allotment and tribal development, legislative frameworks of governance leave a lot of scope for reforms. As the gaps prevail, they have weakened the implementation process of forest resources/lands among Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Tradition Forest Dwellers (TFDs) addressed under the Forest Rights Act. The article also aspires to look into the process towards forest land allotment for STs and TFDs and their linkages with governance institutions which have not been able to sufficiently create/address/promote the well-being and sustainable livelihood. It also looks into the distinctive nature of the Forest Rights Act as force of State and role of non-government organizations leading towards collective interests and norms that shape the quality and quantity of life among STs and other TFDs within society through social capital. Lastly, it discusses the employed methodological considerations, objectives, findings and conclusion.

Keywords

Legislating governance forest land allotment Scheduled Tribes (STs)tradition forest dwellers (TFDs)

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ghate

(2009). Decentralizing forest management: Pretense or reality. Bloomington, IL: Indiana University.

Guha

(1983). Forestry in British and post-British India: A historical analysis. Economic and Political Weekly, 18(44), 40–46.

India

T.G.

(2007, January). The scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers (Recognition of Forest Right Act, 2006). New Delhi: Ministry of Law and Justice.

Johnson

(2003). Decentralisation in India: Poverty, Politics and Panchayati Raj (Working Paper 199). London, UK: Overseas Development Institute.

Larson

(2005). Democratic decentralisation in the forestry sector: Lessons learned from Africa, Asian and Latin America. In Colfer

D. J.

(Ed.), The politics of decentralisation: Forests, power and people (pp. 32–63). London: Earthscan.

Manor

(1999). The political economy of democratic decentralisation. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Ohdedar

(2013). Postcolonial Forest Management: Decentralisation in India through the Forest Rights Act. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/3878643/Postcolonial_Forest_Management_Decentralisation_in_India_through_the_Forest_Rights_Act

Patnaik

(2007). PESA, the Forest Rights Act, and tribal rights in India. Paper presented at the International Conference on Poverty Reduction and Forests, Bangkok.

Pierre

(2000). Introduction: Understanding governance. In Pierre

(Ed.), Debating governance (pp. 3–4). Canada: Oxford University Press.

10.

Qaiyum

(2004). Decentralised planning in India: Issues and options. Institutes of Town Planners, 1(2), 1–14. Retrieved October 2014, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.604.7762&rep=rep1&type=pdf

11.

SAMARTHAN. (2011). Recognition of community rights under Forest Right Act in Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh: Challenges and way foreward. Delhi: UNDP.

12.

Stoker

(1998). Governence theory: Five propositions. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.