Kalpavriksh has always believed that conservation goals achieved without taking into consideration livelihood aspirations of the local communities residing in or near the natural resource can never be sustainable in the long run because it is inherently unjust. Kalpavriksh believes in humans being part of the very nature that they are attempting to conserve. Further, we believe that a world view that excludes humans from the rest of nature is antithetical to conservation. Natural resource governance must include the aspirations of all concerned – from global to local stakeholders, prioritizing the needs of those who have the biggest stake in conserving that particular ecology – the local communities. Kalpavriksh recognizes that local communities are not homogenous groups of people, rather a heterogenous group of people held together through complex relations of caste, class, gender, politics, religion etc. Achieving conservation goals, therefore, need to consider the aspirations and relations of this complex set of individuals and groups. Democratic conservation governance is a participatory approach to conservation that involves working with local communities to create a shared vision for sustainable development. It involves respecting the rights of people and the need to protect the environment. In India, the strongest opportunity for this is the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 (in short, called Forest Rights Act 2006), which empowers communities to not only claim rights to use forests but also to their management and protection. It ensures that local communities, who have historically been excluded from decision-making processes, are given a central role in managing and protecting their environments. This coexistence framework is not only more just, but also more effective.
Kalpavriksh’s concern and focus with democratizing conservation efforts began through an unsuccessful legal intervention in the Supreme Court in 1997-98, which was hearing a petition filed by World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) – India regarding implementation of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 by states and union territories. With the court ordering all state governments to complete the procedures for settling people's rights inside protected areas, this created a situation where not only the legitimate rights of local communities were being eradicated, but was also threatening wildlife through hurried denotifications of protected areas by state governments, to avoid the headache of going through the rights settlement process. In late 1999, Kalpavriksh convinced the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), GOI, to carry out a widely participatory and decentralised process of planning a national strategy for action on conserving India’s biodiversity. This resulted in Kalpavriksh coordinating the technical execution of the UNDP-funded National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process. Besides these, Kalpavriksh has constantly strived to democratize conservation governance through drafting proposed Bills – National Biodiversity Bill, Forest Rights Bill, amendments to the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. At the same time, Kalpavriksh has strived to keep the discussions going around the ideas of biodiversity conservation, challenging established practices of conservation that are harming the sustenance and justice aspects of conservation.
Click here for POLICY BRIEFS
...