Conservation induced displacement in Odisha


Published on

Although mining induced displacement is rampant in Odisha now, at the same time Conservation induced displacement has been taking its toll in the Protected areas. The issue is not much highlighted as that of the industrial displacement. The presentation has tried to highlight case study of post displacement situation (R & R colony).

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Conservation induced displacement in Odisha

  1. 1. Conservation induced displacement in Simlipal: A case study on Kapanda Banbasa & Ambadiha resettlement colonies Madhulika Sahoo International Conference on Resettlement and Rehabilitation Xavier Institute of Management Bhubaneswar 10-12th April 2012
  2. 2. Conservation Induced displacement• Policies assumed protected areas can be maintained without people, they do not recognized the importance of local management and land use practices in sustaining & protecting bio-diversity (Chatty 2008).• The case of Yellowstone National park and armies & colonial police forces in Latin America, Africa, Asia exclude local communities from protected areas• Forced removal & compulsory resettlement, inadequate sustainable livelihood commonly practice• Frequent mediation by NGOs & Govt. providing attractive compensation.• 1994 World Conservation Union ‘Indigenous may own & manage protected area’ (IUCN 1994)
  3. 3. Experiencing displacement in PAs India• National Tiger Conservation Authority ‘To carry out village relocation from notified core area, in compliance of the relevant provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972’• WPA, 1972, requirements have been laid down for voluntary relocation of people on mutually agreed terms and conditions.• Relocation were experienced from different PAs in India and many did not involve long-term follow up on post relocation.• There is limited understanding of the social & environmental injustice issues, and impacts that relocation has on the lives of people (Rangarajan and Shahabuddin, 2006; Karanth and Karanth, 2007)• Relocation in Chandaka-Dampara wildlife Sanctuary & Simlipal Tiger reserve Odisha
  4. 4. Sources: Lasgorceix, A. & Kothari, A. (2009) Displacement & relocation of protected areas : A synthesis & analysis of case studies, Economic & Political weekly, Vol XLIV No 49
  5. 5. Simlipal Tiger Reserve • Simlipal Tiger Reserve is situated in the Mayurbhanj District of Northern Odisha, India • 2,750 sq.Kms in area, 270km from Bhubaneswer, legendry waterfalls, varied forest types and wildlife sources: findings are based on the observation & interview with the relocated population and secondary information, during the field work done for the FRAresearch study in collaboration with Vasundhara & SCSTRI, Bhubaneswar
  6. 6. Growing concern of relocation in Simlipal• The Simlipal Reserve Forest was notified as proposed Sanctuary on 3rd Dec 1979, followed by national park on 6th August 1980 in the intention to provide an inviolate space for the wildlife• Core Area (1,194.75 sq km) four villages namely Jenabil, Jamunagarh, Kabatghai & Bakua were encouraged to relocate Village name Year Families Families More to be Relocated to Relocated to relocated Kapanda Ambadiha Jamunagarh 1994 11 - 23 Jenabil 1998 - 23 - 2010 - 61 Kabataghaie 1994 30 - 20 2003 - 8 Bakua - - - - Sources: Simlipal Tiger Reserve Office
  7. 7. • No relocation from Bakua, the villagers didn’t gave the consent.• Community Forest Right of Jenabil has not been recognized as per the Act• Individual & CFR has not yet been recognized in Jamunagarh, Kabataghaie & Bakua village• Frequent pressure of relocation.• Villages in poor socio-economic, lack of education & health facilities.• Govt. facilities not provided in the core area villages.• Constant suspect to the villagers for wildlife poaching• 2011 Tribal movement in Simlipal demanding rights
  8. 8. Kapanda Banbasa resettlement colony• Situated in Jashipur block, Matiagarh GP 5km from Jashipur• 41 Khadia tribals voluntarily relocated from Jamunagarh & Kabataghaie core area village in 1994.Sources: Photos clicked at Kapada Banabasa colony during the field work in Simlipal
  9. 9. Comparison of Resettlement & Rehabilitation Post 1994 situation Post 2010 situation• R & R provided by the Govt. • The houses are in bad condition were not as per the promise now, no further repairing. made • No safe drinking water facilities,• Provided less sustainable a half dug pond no water, no constructed houses, primary health facilities school at host • Manual labour wages are paid village, maintenance package lesser than it should be of Rs 6000/- for 13 months • No secured livelihood, No• CFR recognized not as per the agricultural land & no forest Act. No NTFP available resources available, walk 50km to get the forest produce• No secured livelihood, no forest resources, no • Some villagers found fulfillment of the facilities. traumatized of losing original land• No cooperation from the host • Not much awareness on Govt. revenue village, sense of facilities belonging in the villagers
  10. 10. Ambadiha Resettlement colony• Colony situated in Udala block, 50km from original village• Total 92HH involuntarily relocated from Kabataghaie Jamunagarh & Jenabil core area village in the year 1998, 2003 & 2010. (Only the Jenabil relocated in 2010 was studied). Sources: Photo clicked at Amabdiha colony during the field visit
  11. 11. Comparison of Resettlement & Rehabilitation Situation in 2010 Situation in 2012 • Homestead & agricultural 2.80 ac• Relocation Violating FRA in land to 20 families (option-II) not March 2010 satisfied• Shifted to tin roof house in hot • No 10lakh amount given to 19 summer families (option-I) no land available to purchase.• No drinking water and health • Poorer quality of grassland & facilities at resettlement colony agricultural land ,Govt. has no land• No secured livelihood, no forest • No livelihood option, no safe resources available. drinking water facilities, no forest resources, no land for cultivation• One reported death in the colony 2010 (sources: Vasundhara) • No access to bank accounts, no settlement of forest right.• One time food provided by the • More pressure on available Govt. stopped after some days resources• Less cooperation from host • Villagers demanding land village due to mix community development, livelihood & other development facilities.• Language was a barrier
  12. 12. Impact of displacement Distorted from traditional practices Accesstless Negative ness attitude towards Govt. Relocation Food from PA insecuritySeasonalmigration Joblessness Landlessness
  13. 13. Suggestion• Follow legal mandates- Vesting of forest rights under FRA• Transparency- On expenditure of the R & R package & access to bank details• Providing livelihood options- Training, occupation, market• Basic Infrastructure-Agricultural land, water facilities, houses, market linkage, common property resources• Trust- Grievance redressal & executing R & R plan in time• Coping-New place, people & culture (stay intact with their own traditional practices)• Monitoring- Tracking, data base, process documentation• Coexistence-E.g. Proposal in Rajaji National park, UP the tribals will be key actors to design & implement the management plan• Sustainable livelihood- Through market linkage of the NTFP in Simlipal