Livelihood Sustainability of Forest Dependent Communities in a Mine-spoiled Degraded Area 1
2
Narendra Nath Dalei and Yamini Gupt 1
Department of Economics & International Business, University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, Energy Acres, Bidholi, Dehradun, Uttarakhand,India; Email:
[email protected] [email protected]
2
Department of Business Economics, South Campus, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India Email:
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Mining is one of the most adverse anthropogenic interventions that cause degradation of forest ecosystem. Not only does it destroy the habitat of wild animals and birds but also does impact the livelihood of forest dependent communities negatively. This paper tries to explore the intertemporal sustainability of livelihoods of the forest dependent communities affected by limestone and dolomite mining during last 50 years in Purnapani area of the Sundargarh district of Odisha state in India. The study covered 312 households in Purnapani area. Using an Intertemporal Sustainable Livelihoods Security Index (ISLSI), the study shows that sustainability of livelihood declined while the mining activity was ongoing and increased marginally during post-mining period due to initiation of ecological restoration in the mine-spoiled area. Key words: Mining, Ecosystem, Livelihood Mathematics Subject Classification Number: 91B76, 91B82 JEL: Q56, Q57
1. Introduction Mining is one of the most adverse anthropogenic interventions that cause degradation of forest ecosystem. Not only does it destroy the habitat of wild animals and birds but also does impact the livelihood of forest dependent communities negatively. Mining happens in and around forest areas, as mineral deposits are abundant there. In any forest locality, during pre-mining period, resources are abundant, the size of forest dependent community is small and the ecosystem is likely to be in a natural or close to natural state. However, mining operation if undertaken attracts people from outside the area by providing them direct and indirect employment opportunities. During the entire mining period, population size increases leading to increase in
1
population pressure; there is over utilization of resources leading to degradation of ecosystem and ecosystem services. Mining deposits are finite in supply and are eventually exhausted. In the post-mining period, people tend to face acute unemployment problems, which threaten their livelihood pattern and trap them in extreme poverty. Their livelihood patterns become unsustainable and their dependence on natural resources increases. This results in overexploitation of these resources, negative impact on ecosystem services and therefore completes the vicious circle of poverty.
Because of mining activities in and around the forest area, population pressure on the forest ecosystem increases mostly due to inward migration. Therefore, the dependence on forest for livelihood is increased because of dependence of immigrants, indigenous people and other forest dependent people in the area if any. Some times migrant people leave the area after closing of the mining but some times, they do not leave. Again, the dependence on the forest continues during post-mining period. Therefore, during mining period forest ecosystem is degraded and during post-mining period, the resilience of the ecosystem is impossible as during both periods rate of extraction exceeds the natural growth rate. Dependence of indigenous and other forest dependent communities on forest ecosystem for their livelihood continues irrespective of the time period. Because of resource scarcity during post-mining period, people start migrating to other areas in search of jobs and alternate sources of livelihood.
Of the relatively few authors who have studied the impact of mining on the natural ecosystem and livelihood of local people, Mishra et al. (2004) have studied the impact of limestone and dolomite mines of Sundargarh district of Odisha. They find that mining operations not only disrupt the natural ecosystem in a significant way, but also bring about a number of health hazards and socioeconomic disturbances to the local people. According to Mundu (2003) the extractive industries like oil, gas and coal lead to an erosion of the indigenous people’s rights over land, forest, and their livelihood resource base. Bury (2002) finds that transnational mining operations are dramatically altering livelihood resources and transforming the environmental, social and economic contexts for livelihoods. On the other hand, Twyman (2001) has argued that linkages between livelihood opportunities and resource availability are not simple, linear and direct rather, they are shaped by the history of resource relationships in the settlement.
We find hardly any recent studies pertaining to livelihood, mining activities and forest ecosystem services. However, the studies by Dayal (2008), Temesgen et al. (2013), Sohel et al. (2010), and Mwakaje (2013), which are based on primary surveys are prominent literature on livelihood and forest dependent communities. Using data from a survey of 227 households in 4 different villages in, and near Ranthambhore National Park Dayal (2008) observed that only Brahmin households have low dependence on the park, where as Gujjar and Koli households have a high dependence for both grazing and fuelwood, and Berwa households have a high
2
dependence for fuelwood. Most recently, Temesgen et al. (2013) have a view that forest being an important resource base for economic development if will be managed properly will provide a continuous flow of income, subsistence products with support for other economic activities and will therefore sustain livelihood through its ecological services and functions. Comparing the socioeconomic condition and forest dependency before and after implementation of comanagement activities in Rema-Kalenga Wildlife Sanctuary, Sohel et al. (2010) find that the major income generating livelihood activities were agro farming, followed by fuelwood collection, nursery raising, cattle rearing, fisheries and others. Selecting a total of 110 households randomly for interviews in Tanzania and using Choice Model analysis, Mwakaje (2013) finds that while “United Nation’s Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+)” has the potential to address deforestation, it is questionable whether the livelihood aspect as preferred by communities will be achieved due to mainly inefficient governance structures in place. Therefore, livelihood sustainability not only depends on conservation of forest and its ecosystem services but also on efficient governance structures with better management. 1
Now in the mining context we observe from the State of Environment Report of Orissa state (2006) that modern mining in Odisha as per available records started in 1909, when coal was first excavated in the Rampur area of the Ib river valley. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (TISCO) mines for iron ore at Gorumohisani and manganese mine in Goriajhar (Gangpur State) started in 1910 followed by dolomite and limestone mining in 1914 at Panposh and Bisra respectively. Mining of chromite in Baula area started much later, in 1942. Purnapani Limestone and Dolomite Quarry (PL&DQ) was started initially as a captive manual mine of the Rourkela Steel Plant (RSP). Manual mining operation of PL& DQ was started in September 1958 and the mechanized mining, in 1965. The total land contributed by Purnapani villagers for mining, township and railway line construction was 569.64 acres. In 2003, there was a closure of the operation of mines and about 2000 workers, working in the mines lost their livelihood. The State of Environment Report of Orissa state (2006) also presents that up to the late 1950s when the mines were small and mostly manual, their environmental impact was not very significant. However, after 1958, large scale mechanized mines came up with the establishment of large industries. These mines and the beneficiation plants/washeries, waste dumps and effluents discharged increased pollution in and around the mines. The mines mostly being located in and around forest areas were considered responsible for increased deforestation and ecosystem degradation leading to unsustainable livelihood of indigenous and other forest dependent communities.
Some authors (some of whose work has been cited above) have studied the impact of extractive industries like mining on local livelihoods while studying different aspects of natural ecosystem and livelihood changes. Hardly any work has been done in this area that attempts 1
The state of Orissa is now called Odisha
3
to show the livelihood sustainability in a mine spoiled degraded area over a period of time. This paper works with the economic hypothesis that the sustainability of livelihood of forest dependent communities has been declining in Purnapani area due to mining activities. In this context our basic objective is to study the pattern of livelihood of forest dependent communities of Purnapani mine spoiled area. In this paper we look at four time periods, “Pre-Mining”, “Transition”, “Mining” and “Post-Mining” to compare and contrast the impact of mining activity on the livelihood sustainability of forest dependent communities in Purnapani Limestone and Dolomite Quarry Area.
The remaining part of the paper has been arranged as follows. Section two gives a conceptual outline on mining, livelihood and sustainable development. Section three introduces the study area and primary survey. The methodology in terms of dimension and framework of livelihood is explained in section four. Section five describes the descriptive data analysis. Details about the ecological restoration initiated in the area are presented in section six. Sections seven and eight constitute the results and discussion; and conclusion and policy implication respectively.
2. Mining, Livelihoods and Indicators of Sustainable Development It is a common belief that mining activities in mineral rich countries directly contribute to economic development. Over the past few decades, a more negative view of mining has emerged that questions the positive relationship between mining activities and economic development (Davis and Tilton, 2005). However, the sustainability of livelihood of forest dependent communities as a fundamental issue has not been addressed in most mining projects worldwide. The concept of ‘livelihood’ has been defined and developed differently. Its dictionary definition is ‘means to a living’. Broadly speaking, the ways and means of ‘making a living’ together form livelihood. In the report of an Advisory Panel of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, 1987), sustainable livelihood security has been proposed as an integrating concept that defined “Livelihood” as adequate stocks and flows of food and cash to meet basic needs. In an IDS discussion paper “Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century”, Chambers and Conway (1992) conceptualized that livelihood comprises the “capabilities”, “assets” (stores, resources, claims and access) and “activities” required for a means of living. However according to Ellis (2000), the use of capabilities overlaps assets and activities and as a consequence the use of capabilities as a component of a livelihood definition is potentially confusing. “Asset” according to Chambers and Conway (1992) consists of various components like different types of capital (resources and stores), claims and access. While the tangible capital component is recognized in economic categories, the intangible component like claims and access are not. Sustaining rural livelihoods is critically linked to the enhancement of this tangible component like natural capital, physical capital, human capital, financial capital,
4
th
th
and social capital (Reddy, et al. 2008). In late 19 and early 20 century several researchers like Carswell (1997), Hussein and Nelson (1998), and Scoones (1998), adopting a rural livelihoods approach, have made modifications to the concept of livelihood (Ellis, 2000). Several frameworks have been proposed for the analysis of livelihood which include the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) (FAO, Carney, 1998, 1999; Scoones, 1998), the Framework for Rural Livelihoods (Ellis, 2000), Capital and Capabilities Framework (Bebbington, 1999), and Sustainable Livelihood Diamond (UNDP, 1999). These frameworks have different emphases rather than fundamental conceptual differences. Attempting to integrate assets, constraints, and human capabilities in a scientific manner they analyze the status, form, nature and condition of livelihoods over space and time (Hulme et al., 2006).
The Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) (Carney, 1998, 1999; Scoones, 1998) conceptualizing five types of capital (human, physical, natural, financial, and social) as a means for producing livelihood, has fundamentally changed the way, scholars, policy makers, and development agencies think about and address poverty (Dewi et al., 2006). The above five main categories of capital contributing to assets in the livelihood definition have also been identified by the followers of the Chamber and Conway (1992) line of thinking. Thus a livelihood as defined by Ellis (2000) comprises the assets (natural, physical, human, financial and social capital), the activities, and the access to these (mediated by institutions and social relations) that together determine the living gained by the individual or household.
Household livelihood security index (HLSI) is a participatory and rapid community assessment technique developed by Lindenberg (2002) that helps to identify the constraints to peoples’ wellbeing. Hahn et al. (2009) developed the Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) to estimate climate change vulnerability in the Mabote and Moma Districts of Mozambique. Using the LVI they found that Moma and Mabote might be more vulnerable in terms of water resources and sociodemographic structure respectively. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite indicator used to rank countries by level of "human development" and is used to mark developed, developing, and underdeveloped countries (Watkins, 2007).
The operational measure proposed by Swaminathan (1991) to check whether the necessary conditions essential for the attainment of sustainable livelihood security (SLS) are present in a given region or ecosystem is known as the “Sustainable Livelihood Security Index (SLSI)”. The SLSI has three interacting components viz. ecological security, economic efficiency and social equity. Saleth (1993) developed the agricultural sustainability status of the agro-climatic subzones of India by selecting forest cover, per capita utilizable groundwater potential, and population density as ecological indicators; land productivity, labour productivity, and per capita cereal output as economic indicators; and people above poverty line, female literacy, and current groundwater use as a per cent of its ultimate potential as equity indicators.
5
All the indicators explained above are spatial in nature as they use cross-sectional data at point in time. These indicators lack ability to measure sustainability over time. However, sustainability is a dynamic concept and an intertemporal index plays an important role to measure it.
Source: Google Map of Purnapani Mine-spoiled degraded Area
3. Study Area and Primary Survey We have selected Purnapani area (see fig.1) of Sundargarh district of the state of Odisha, which is situated between latitudes 22° 24' 38" and 22° 24' 52" north and longitudes 84° 51' 42" and 84° 54' 23"east. The area consists of four villages viz. Purnapani, Gattitangar, Bhojpur, and 2
Karkatnasa; one abandoned mine (PL & DQ), and one reserved forest . The total geographical area of the study site is 1552 hectares along with 10.77 hectares of forest and 230.53 hectares of mine-spoiled area. The study area consists of total cultivated area of 1310.7 hectares with a population size of 7743 persons as per 2001 census. The inhabitants of Purnapani area were dependent on the forest for their livelihood, as there existed a reserved forest inside the area. Therefore, these inhabitants were an integral part of the local forest ecosystem. The local reserved forest is now in a degraded state due to the mining activities.
2
As per the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 “reserve forest” means the forest declared to be reserved by the State Government under sec.20. of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (16 of 1927). As per Indian forest act, 1927, the State Government may constitute any forest-land or waste-land which is the property of Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest-produce of which the Government is entitled, a reserved forest in the manner hereinafter provided.
6
Fig. 1: Location map of Purnapani Area inside the Sundargarh District
In order to collect data for our study we conducted a primary survey in the area by following the method of ‘Repeated Cross-sectional Waves with Retrospective one-shot Study (RCWRS)’. In RCWRS the total time period is divided into various sub- periods. For each sub-period a new sample is selected at random from the same sampling frame without repetition. A sampling frame of 1052 households was prepared by listing each household. Then households were classified based upon their principal occupation and age of senior member. From each sector 30 % of households were taken into account giving high priority to households with persons belonging to higher age group. The questionnaire was same for each sub-period. Along with the senior members, selected based upon their age, other family members were also included in the survey to draw accurate information for that particular sub-period. The information drawn from this type of survey was recall based and was showing the average value of the variables for each sub-period. In Purnapani area the respondents were interviewed only once during the survey period, March to August 2009. Taking into account the mining activities in Purnapani area, the time period is divided into four sub-periods: pre-mining, transition, mining and post-mining period. The period prior to 1955 is considered as pre-mining period. Considering the mining activity based upon manual and mechanized operations and their environmental impacts, the period from 1955 to 1960 is considered as transition period; the period when the local economy was moving from forest dependent to mining dependent economy. Manual mining activities had started during the middle (1958) of transition period. Therefore, during transition period there was beginning of human intervention in terms of manual mining activities. The period from 1960 to 2003 is known as the “mining period” when the mining operation was active with heavy population pressure
7
leading to severe deforestation. The period from 2003 onwards is known as “post-mining period” when the mining operation was inactive but its impact was there in terms of abandoned mines, over burden dump, and degraded forest. After compiling the primary survey data we used “Intertemporal Livelihood Security Index (ISLSI)” to compute sustainability of livelihood of the forest dependent communities of Purnapani area since pre-mining period.
4. Methodology The methodology of this study is based upon dimension of livelihood sustainability derived from literature and Intertemporal Sustainable Livelihood Security Index (ISLSI) which we have formulated taking into account the UNDP’s human development index. 4.1 Dimensions of Livelihood Sustainability From the existing literature it is evident that the three dimensions of livelihood sustainability are: ecological security, social equity and economic efficiency. Ecological sustainability refers to how biological systems remain diverse and productive in a spatial and temporal scale. Social sustainability is the potential for long-term maintenance of human well being. This kind of sustainability depends on the well being of the natural ecosystem and the sustainable use of natural resources. The economic sustainability is the use of resources under current technological conditions to meet the present developmental needs of society. Both empirically and theoretically, it is very essential from the sustainability point of view to investigate the interactions between economy, environment and society in order to explore the level of livelihood sustainability. It is the simultaneous interaction rather than partial interaction, which brings a state of sustainability for any region at any period of time. The theoretical framework for computation of inter-temporal sustainable livelihood security index (ISLSI) for any locality is given below.
4.2 Theoretical Frame of Intertemporal Sustainable Livelihood Security Index In this paper we have considered “d” dimensions for the livelihood sustainability. Each dimension consists of j component variables (CV). Then there exist two digits m and n in the
i j variable matrix such that m1,2... iandn1,2... j. The component indices (CI) of a given dimension are calculated from its respective CVs. The
i j variable matrix of the CVs
and CIs for a given dimension is presented in Table 1.
8
Table 1: Component Variables (CV) and Component Indices (CI)
CV1
C V2
…
CV j
CI1
CI 2
…
CI j
X11
X12
…
X1 j
Y11
Y12
…
Y1 j
X 21
X2 2
…
X2 j
Y21
Y22
…
Y2 j
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
X i1
Xi2
…
X ij
Yi1
Yi 2
…
Yij
Source: Author’s formulation
After selecting CVs the CIs of each dimension are calculated by following the UNDP’s HDI formula (see Watkins, 2007) as:
Y11
X1 j min X i j X11 min X i1 … Y1 j max X i j min X i j max X i1 min X i1
…………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………
Yi1
Xi j minXi j X i1 min X i1 … Yi j max X i1 min X i1 maxXi j minXi j
For a given household, the dimension index for a particular dimension (DIH) is calculated as the
average of CIs for that household . The DIHs for 3
i th
j th dimension being a
household and
column vector are given below.
j
Z1 j
Where,
Z ij
Y1 j n 1
indicates the DIH of
,
j
i th
Z2 j
j
Y2 j n 1
j
household for
, … Z ij
j
Y
ij
n 1
j
.
j th dimension. The dimension index of a
given locality (DIL) at a given time period is the average of all the DIHs in their respective dimensions.
3
Equal weight is given to each household in the study area, as these are more or less homogenous and belonging to a subsistence economy.
9
Table 2: Inter-Temporal Sustainable Livelihood Security Index (ISLSI) Dimension
L1
L2
…
Ld
L11
L12
…
L1d
ISLSI
Time Period
L1
d
L
1d
n 1
d
L2
L21
L22
…
L2 d
d
L
2d
n 1
d … …
… …
… …
Lt
Lt1
Lt 2
… … …
… …
… …
Ltd
d
L n 1
td
d Source: Author’s formulation
The DIL of
t th time period for d th
dimension of a given locality is derived as:
i
Lt d
Z m1
ij
i
j Yij i n 1 j m 1 Ltd i i
j
Y
ij
Ltd
Where,
m 1 n 1
ij
(1)
Ltd indicates DIL of t th time period for d th dimension of a given locality.
The Inter-temporal sustainable livelihood security index (ISLSI) for a given locality at a given time period is theaverage of all the DILs of the dimensions for that locality for that time period. Hence, the ISLSI is specified as:
10
d
L
td
ISLSIt The
n 1
(2)
d
Ltd matrix of d dimension and t time period is presented in Table 2. The inter-temporal
livelihood of indigenous people of Purnapani area is explored in this paper by sustainability of taking into account the literature and applying ISLSI technique. Three dimensions having two component variables in each dimension are chosen for the analysis. These dimensions are inter-temporal ecological dimension (IELD), inter-temporal economic dimension (IED) and inter-temporal social dimension (ISD). The detailed data analysis, result and discussion are presented in the following sections.
5. Descriptive Data Analysis This section provides descriptive analysis of the data (see Table 3) generated by primary survey conducted in and around the study area.
5.1 Ecological Dimension In the ecological dimension, two component variables (CV) that are chosen for estimation of inter-temporal ecological sustainability (IES) of ISLSI are (i) harvesting fish from the agricultural field during rainy season (FHA) and (ii) Hunting wild animals from the forest (HWA).
The people of Purnapani area harvest fish from the agricultural field during rainy season to support their livelihood. They also hunt animals like wild chicken, wild goat, wild pig, rabbit, snake, and other reptiles from the forest. More harvesting and hunting depend upon more availability, which in turn depends upon the suitable ecological condition for their growth. While fish harvesting is undertaken independently, wild animal hunting is undertaken collectively. After hunting, the wild animals are slaughtered and the meat is distributed equally among the participants of the hunting mission. As shown in Table 3, during pre mining period the households of Purnapani area had harvested on an average of 5.44 kg of 4
fish from the agricultural field during rainy season and 1.47 kg of meat by hunting wild animals from the forest (which ranged from 0 to 30 kg and 0 to 8 kg respectively) per annum. During transition period the mean amount of fish harvested declined by 42.35 per cent and meat by 63.27 per cent per household per annum. Similarly, the mean amount of harvesting of fish declined by 40.57 per cent and meat by 81.48 per cent per household per annum during the mining period. However, the mean amount of fish harvested increased by 4
Fishes are available in the agricultural field during rainy season only. During other seasons agricultural fields are dry.
11
19.76 per cent and meat by 40 per cent per household per annum during post-mining period. Table 3: Descriptive Statistics of Component Variables (Mean SD), n=312a Dimensions Variables
Ecological
FHA (n=78)
Pre-mining Period
Transition Period
Mining Period
Post-mining Period
(Before 1955)
(1955-1960)
(1961-2003)
(After 2003)
5.44+7.03 (0-30)
2.81+4.67 (0-20)
1.67+6.44 (0-50)
2+4.78 (0-20)
1.47+2.23 (0-8)
0.54+1.35 (0-5)
0.10+0.66 (0-5)
0.14+1.04 (0-9)
11.22+12.72 (0-40)
3.29+4.33 (0-19)
1.84+5.67 (0-33.95)
1.89+4.15 (0-27.95)
18.95+32.62 (0-250)
10.28+15.34 (0-65.6)
5.05+14.99 (0-99.3)
4.09+9.62 (0-64)
2.83+3.70 (0-14)
3.47+3.93 (0-15)
6.69+4.81 (0-15)
6.38+4.83 (0-18)
98.04+1.65 (93.67-100)
97.53+2.64 (89.73-100)
69.54+12.99 (45-96)
64.96+16.42 (32.12-98.94)
(kg /year) HWA (n=78) (kg /year) Economic
TLO (n=78) (in acres) PDQ (n=78) (quintals /year)
Social
HEL (n=78) (in years) PSA (n=78) (in Rs.)
a
1. The overall sample size is, n=312 for the entire time period. 2. The sample size in a specific sub-period is n=78. 3. Ranges’ are given in the parentheses Source: Primary survey by author
5.2 Economic Dimension In the economic dimension of ISLSI two CVs that are chosen for estimation of inter-temporal economic efficiency (IEE) are (i) total land owned by the household (TLO) and (ii) annual paddy production (PDQ).
Agriculture is the major economic activity in Purnapani area. Households of Purnapani area own four categories of land for agriculture viz. high land, medium land, low land and forestland converted for agriculture. Elevated or mountainous land is high land, where pulses are cultivated. A low flat land relative to the surrounding area is low land where paddy and other cereals are cultivated. In between high land and low land, the medium land is situated,
12
where paddy, other cereals and vegetables are cultivated. Households of Purnapani area have encroached and converted some forestland for agriculture purpose. Therefore, the total land owned by the households (TLO) for cultivation purpose consists of high, medium, low and forest land. Agricultural activities mainly depend upon monsoon rain in Purnapani area. Paddy is the major crop, which is mainly cultivated during kharif season (July-October).
During pre-mining period the households of Purnapani area had owned on an average of 11.22 acres of land and produced 18.95 quintals of paddy (which ranged from 0 to 40 acres and 0 to 5
250 quintals respectively) per annum. During transition period the mean amount of land owned declined by 70.68 per cent and paddy production by 45.75 per cent per household per annum. 6
During mining period the mean amount of land owned declined by 44.07 per cent and paddy production by 50.88 per cent per household per annum. During post-mining period the mean 7
amount of land owned increased by 2.72 per cent and paddy production declined by 19.01 per cent per household per annum.
5.3 Social Dimension Inter-temporal social equity (ISE) is measured using highest education level of the members of the household (HEL) and percentage of income spent for performing social activities (PSA) (which includes expenditure on food, social functions viz. marriage, religious function, and other social traditions, and other miscellaneous activities such as travelling to market, visiting to relative’s house etc.) as CVs. Education level of a household determines the extent of decision-making in various social activities. Higher the level of education of members of households better is assessment and understanding of social phenomena happening in every day life. Better living standard of households depends upon the knowledge, and skill of its members, which in turn depends upon education level. Therefore, other things remaining constant higher education level of the members of the households should lead to a better living standard. The social status of the household is considered to be better if it is capable of spending more income on social activities. This indicates that the household has more to spare for social purposes after taking care of other needs. The highest education level is considered based upon the attainment of vertically highest years of schooling of any member of the household. During pre-mining period the highest education level attained by the members of the households was on an average 2.8 years and it ranged from 0 to 14 years. During transition period the same had increased by 22.61 per cent. During mining period the highest education level further 5 6
7
The amount of land declined during transition period because the inhabitants had contributed their land for mining activities. The amount of land declined during mining period because of division of joint family resulting division of their land among the brothers. The amount of land increased marginally during post-mining period because the inhabitants encroached some amount of forestland.
13
increased by 92.8 percent; however, had declined by 4.63 per cent during post-mining 8
period. The household average income spent on social activities was 98.04 percent with a range of 93.67 to 100 percent during pre-mining period as against 97.53 percent with a range of 89.73 to 100 percent, 69.54 percent with a range of 45 to 96 percent, and 64.96 percent with a range of 32.12 to 98.94 percent during transition, mining and post -mining period respectively.
6. Ecological Restoration in Purnapani Area Ecological restoration has been carried out in Purnapani mine spoiled area since 2005 by Centre for Environmental Management of Degraded Ecosystem (CEMDE), University of Delhi in collaboration with Department of Biotechnology, Government of India and Steel Authority of India Limited. The total leased area for mining activity was 230.53 hectares. CEMDE restored 28 hectares of mine-spoiled land and converted it into a terrestrial ecosystem. The total mined out area was 108.07 hectares where the actual quarrying was undertaken. After 2003 the quarries were filled with water and were converted into three water bodies. These water bodies were also restored ecologically and converted into an aquatic ecosystem of 108.07 hectares by CEMDE.
7. Results and Discussion Table 4 and fig.3 show that household level intertemporal ecological sustainability (IES) declined in and around Purnapani area during transition and mining periods due to impact of unsustainable mining activities and subsequently increased during post-mining period due to ecological restoration.
The average amount of fish collected from the agricultural fields declined and smaller quantities of meat were harvested. This was the adverse impact the mining activity had on the ecosystem and therefore on the availability of fish and meat. This has resulted in a temporal decline of household level IES except during post-mining period. The result from ISLSI suggests that the IES declined by 33 percent during transition period, 83 percent during mining period, and 67 percent during post-mining period as compared to pre-mining period. The ecological restoration undertaken in the area explains why the IES shows a rising trend in the post-mining period.
Household level Intertemporal Economic Efficiency (IEE) as seen from Table 4 also declined since pre-mining period. The total land owned by the households had decreased since pre-
8
The variable PSA measures the total expenditure of the household on food and social activities. Expenditure on food and social activities is equal to total income minus expenditure on health care. The local economy is in subsistence level and saving is almost zero. Therefore, the mean amount of PSA is around 98 percent during pre-mining and transition period, which ranged almost from 90 to 100 percent. However, during mining and post-mining period the mean PSA is around 70 and 65 percent due to on an average 30 and 35 percent of total income is spent on health care.
14
mining period except during post-mining period when it increased marginally. At the same time the mean paddy production per household decreased continuously across the different time periods leading to a downward sloping IEE curve shown in fig. 3.
a
Table 4: Intertemporal Livelihood Security Index (ILSI) Result Period
IES
IEE
ISE
ISLSI (n=312)
Before 1955
0.18
0.18
0.45
0.27 (n=78)
1955-1960
0.12
0.17
0.49
0.26 (n=78)
1961-2003
0.03
0.05
0.46
0.18 (n=78)
After 2003
0.06
0.07
0.42
0.18 (n=78) a 1. Because of unavailability of continuous time series data we used survey data of discrete time periods to calculate ISLSI. 2. Sample sizes (n) are presented in the parentheses Source: Primary survey by author The ISLSI calculated suggest that the IEE during pre-mining period was 0.18. The IEE declined by 6 percent during transition period, 72 percent during mining period and 61 percent during post-mining period as compared to pre-mining period. The decline of IEE was more during mining period as compared to transition and post-mining period because the people of Purnapani area had contributed 230.53 hectares of land for mining activities and there was no sustainable livelihood option. As a result total paddy production had declined by 46 percent during transition period, 73 percent during mining period and 78 percent during post-mining period as compared to paddy production during pre-mining period. There was a 40 percent rise in IEE during post-mining period as compared to mining period because the total land owned by the households had increased by 2.53 percent during the former period as compared to later period.
Household level ISE had increased temporally during transition and mining period and had declined marginally during post-mining period in and around Purnapani area. The highest level of years of the education of the household members on an average had increased slowly across the time periods except for post-mining period when it declined marginally where as at the same time percentage of income spent on social activities had declined continuously causing ISE to increase during transition and mining period and decline marginally during postmining period as compared to pre-mining period. The result from ISLSI analysis suggest that the ISE during transition and mining period had increased by 8 percent and 2 percent respectively as compared to pre-mining period. However, the ISE declined by 7 percent during
15
post-mining period as compared to pre-mining period. Mining activities had brought some social th
changes by providing educational facilities like schooling up to 10 standard, technical craft training and hospital facilities in and around Purnapani area as a result of which the ISE increased during transition and mining period though declined marginally during post-mining period.
Fig. 3: Intertemporal change of Livelihood Security The declining nature of ISE during post-mining period is because of lack of livelihood option as the inhabitants of the area are more inclined to wage employment than obtaining higher education. During transition and mining period the combined impact of ecological and economic dimension had suppressed the impact of social dimension on sustainable livelihood. It is evident from the above analysis that both ecological and economic dimensions had declined though social dimension had increased during transition and mining period causing intertemporal sustainable livelihood security index to decline during the same period as compared to premining period. However, the increase of ecological and economic dimension during post-mining period had counter balanced the decline of social dimension during the same period as compared to mining period. This resulted in the intertemporal sustainable livelihood security to remain constant during mining and post-mining period. The result suggests that the sustainability of livelihood declined by 37 percent during transition period, and declined by and
16
remained constant at 33 percent during both mining and post-mining period relative to premining period respectively. The down ward sloping nature of ISLSI curve shows that the degree of sustainability of livelihood had been deteriorating continuously across the different time periods because of impact of unsustainable mining as well as due to impact of abandoned mines in and around Purnapani area.
8. Conclusions and Policy Implication Mining is an extractive industry that is known to have adverse impact on the local ecosystem. Several authors have studied the impact of such extractive industries on local livelihoods at a point in time. In this study we look at livelihood sustainability in a mine-spoiled degraded ecosystem over a period of time. By constructing an Intertemporal Sustainable Livelihood Security Index (ISLSI), we have incorporated three dimensions such as: Ecological Security, Economic Efficiency and Social Equity. The intertemporal ecological sustainability declined in and around Purnapani area from the transition to the mining period. This declining trend was due to impact of unsustainable mining activities during these periods. However, during postmining period the ecological sustainability increased as a result of the ecological restoration undertaken in the area. The ‘Intertemporal Economic Efficiency’ also exhibited a declining trend, but more so during the mining period. This was because the people of Purnapani area had contributed 230.53 hectares of land for mining activities and that had a negative impact on economic efficiency.
The intertemporal social equity during transition and mining period increased relative to premining period. Mining activities had brought some social changes by providing educational and health facilities in and around Purnapani area, which had resulted the intertemporal social equity to increase during transition and mining period though declined marginally during post-mining period relative to pre-mining period. The inhabitants of the area are always depending on near by urban areas for wage employment to meet their daily domestic expenditure and they have less inclination for higher education. Therefore, during post-mining period the intertemporal social equity had declined as compared to all other time periods.
The intertemporal sustainable livelihood security shows a declining trend during the transition and mining periods and remains constant there after. The overall declining nature of intertemporal sustainable livelihood security across the different time period is as a result of overall declining nature of intertemporal ecological sustainability, economic efficiency and social equity which were directly impacted by unsustainable mining activities in and around Purnapani area. From the above analysis the major conclusion we draw here is that intertemporal ecological sustainability, economic efficiency and social equity play an important role in livelihood sustainability of forest dependent communities. The anthropogenic
17
intervention like mining activity, which is responsible for overall declining trend of ecological sustainability, economic efficiency and social equity led to unsustainable livelihood of forest dependent communities in Purnapani area. The livelihood-ecosystem nexus is much more important than profit making of any public or private enterprise contributing to national economic growth through resource extraction activities like mining. Economic development should not be compromised in order to maintain ecosystem services, but there should always be a balance between economic development and conservation of ecosystem services.
In Purnapani area the overall declining nature of
intertemporal sustainable livelihood security across the different time period is as a result of unsustainable mining activities. However, this kind of livelihood unsustainability can be corrected through policy changes of adopting drastic and large-scale ecological restoration in the mine spoiled degraded site. Without large-scale ecological restoration it would be very difficult to save and protect the livelihood of forest dependent communities in Purnapani area. Again policy makers and planners should think seriously while giving mining lease either to government or private agencies and should ensure the maintenance of local forest ecosystem in natural or close to natural state so that livelihood of the forest dependent communities can be protected and can create other alternate sources of livelihood for local population. 9. Acknowledgment The authors greatly acknowledge the Department of Biotechnology, Government of India for financial support to carry out this study through the project entitled, “Environmental Biotechnology Restoration Ecology” sanctioned to the Centre for Environmental Management of Degraded Ecosystem (CEMDE), University of Delhi. The authors are indebted to the logistic support provided by CEMDE for research and analysis and the logistic support provided by Purnapani Limestone and Dolomite Quarry (PL&DQ), Steel Authority of India (SAIL) to carry out the primary surveys.
REFERENCES
Bebbington, A., 1999. Capitals and Capabilities: A Framework for Analyzing Peasant Viability, Rural Livelihoods and Poverty. World Development. 27 (12), 2021-2044. Bury Jeffrey., 2002. Livelihoods, Mining and Peasant Protests in the Peruvian Andes, Journal of Latin American Geography. 1.(1), 1-19. Carney, D., 1998. Implementing the sustainable rural livelihoods approach. Paper presented to the DFID Natural Resource Advisers’ Conference. London: Department for International Development. Carney, D., 1999. Approaches to sustainable livelihoods for the poor. London: Overseas Development Institute.
18
Carswell, G., 1997. Agricultural intensification and sustainable rural livelihoods: a think piece, IDS Working Paper 64, Brighton: IDS Chambers, R. and Conway, G., 1992. Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concept for the 21st century, IDS Discussion paper 296. Davis, Graham A. and John. E. Tilton., 2005. The Resource Curse. Natural Resources Forum. 29, 233-242. Dayal, V., 2008. Inter- and intra-village diversity among forest dependent households in Ranthambhore National Park, India. Int. J. Ecol. Econ. Stat., 10, No. W08. Dewi, Sonya. , Belcher, Brian., and Achdiawan, Ramadhani., 2006. Assessment of spatial and temporal dynamics of livelihoods: A methodological perspective”, A presented paper in th 9 Biennial Conference on Ecological Sustainability and Human Well-Being, 15-18 December at India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. Ellis, F.,2000. Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Hahn, M.B., Riederer A.M.,Foster S.O., 2009. The Livelihood Vulnerability Index: A pragmatic approach to assessing risks from climate variability and change—A case study in Mozambique. Global Environ. Change. 11,002. Hulme, David and Chimhowu, Admos., 2006. Livelihood Dynamics in Planned and Spontaneous Resettlement in Zimbabwe: Converging and Vulnerable, World Development. 34(4),728-750. Hussein, Karim and John Nelson., 1998. Sustainable Livelihoods and Diversification. IDS Working Paper 69. London: Institute of Development Studies. Lindenberg, Marc., 2002. Measuring Household Livelihood Security at the Family and Community Level in the Developing World, World Development. 30(2),301–318. Mishra P.C., Sahu H.B., and Patel R.K., 2004. Environmental Pollution Status as a Result of Limestone and Dolomite Mining- A Case Study, Pollution Research, 23 (3). Mundu Bineet., 2003. India Case Study, Indigenous Peoples, the Extractive Industries and the World Bank, The case of East Parej Coal Mines Open Cast Project in Jharkland, India. Mwakaje, A. G., (2013). Can REDD+ Compensate Adequately the Forest-Dependent Livelihoods in Tanzania? Insights from Choice Model Analysis in Kilosa District. International Journal of Advanced Research. 1(10), 435-450 Orissa State Pollution Control Board., 2006. State of Environment Orissa 2006, http://ospcboard.org/ stateEnv2006.htm (Accessed 10th April 2009). Pearce, D. W. and G. Atkinson., 1995. Measuring sustainable development. In: D. W. Bromley (ed.). The Handbook of Environmental Economics. Blackwell, Oxford. Reddy, V.Ratna., Reddy, M. Gopinath, Reddy Y.V. Malla and Soussan, John., 2008. Sustaining Rural Livelihoods in Fragile Environments: Resource Endowments and Policy Interventions – A study in the context of Participatory Watershed Development in Andhra Pradesh, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 63 (2). Saleth, R. M., 1993. Agricultural Sustainability Status of the Agro-Climatic Sub-Zones of India: Empirical Illustration of an Indexing Approach, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 48(3),543-550.
19
Saleth, R. M., and M. S. Swaminathan.,1993. Sustainable Livelihood Security Index: A Litmus for Sustainable Development, Paper presented in the United Nations University Conference on the Concept and Measurement of Sustainability: The Biophysical Foundations, World Bank, Washington, DC, June 22-25, 25pp. Scoones, I., 1998. Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis. IDS Working Paper. No.72. Brighton: IDS. Sohel, Md. Shawkat Islam., Rana, Md. Parvez., Karim, Sheikh Md. Fazlul., Akhter, Sayma., 2010. Linking Co-Management, Livelihood and Forest Conservation in Protected Area: A Case Study of Wildlife Sanctuary. Int. J. Ecol. Econ. Stat.,16, No. W10. Swaminathan, M.S., 1991. From Stockholm to Rio de Janeiro: the road to sustainable agriculture. In: Monograph No. 4, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, Madras. Swaminathan, M.S., 1991. Greening of the mind. Indian Journal of Social Work. 52 (3), 401– 407. Temesgen,Y., Bogale, A., and Ketema, M.,2013. Determinates of Degraded Forest Rehabilitation: Ordered Probit Analysis for Skekela Maraim Forest, Western Ethiopia. Int. J. Ecol. Econ. Stat., 31 (4) Twyman Chasca., 2001. Natural resource use and livelihoods in Botswana’s Wildlife Management Areas, Applied Geography. 21, 45–68. UNDP. 1999. Sustainable livelihoods. New York: UNDP. Available from http://undp.org/sl/ (Accessed 10th April 2009). Watkins, K., 2007. Human Development Report, United Nations Development Programme, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY 10010. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development), 1987. Our common future, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York
20
