IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i19p11112-d651901.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysing Challenges and Strategies in Land Productivity in Sikkim Himalaya, India

Author

Listed:
  • Prabuddh Kumar Mishra

    (Department of Geography, Shivaji College, University of Delhi, New Delhi 110027, India)

  • Aman Rai

    (Department of Geography, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, New Delhi 110027, India)

  • Kamal Abdelrahman

    (Department of Geology and Geophysics, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia)

  • Suresh Chand Rai

    (Department of Geography, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, New Delhi 110027, India)

  • Anuj Tiwari

    (Discovery Partners Institute, University of Illinois System, Chicago, IL 60606, USA)

Abstract

Agriculture is the major source of livelihood in rural areas and is considered the backbone of the Indian economy. In Sikkim, agriculture is being practiced by 80% of the rural population, and having no other major livelihood options has created immense pressure on the farmers and agricultural land. Agriculture sector is under great stress as the farmers are being confronted by various challenges in Sikkim Himalaya in recent years, such as land degradation, climate change and socio-economic problems. Despite the number of indigenous agriculture management methods being practised in Sikkim Himalaya, the agricultural production system is weakening. In this context, this paper presents an analysis of challenges faced by indigenous communities, local farmers and potential sustainable strategies for their management in Rani Khola watershed of Sikkim Himalaya. Data and information were collected by field observation, questionnaire surveys of 300 households, key informant interviews and focus group discussions conducted during 2017–18. Data processing and analysis were carried out with a combination of techniques, such as the application of remote sensing (RS), geographic information system (GIS)-based data processing and descriptive statistics. Major challenges identified in the watershed are water scarcity (80%), climate change (88%), soil erosion and runoff (72%), higher investment cost (100%), lack of irrigation facilities (77%), fragmentation and size of landholdings (100), human–wildlife conflict (59%) and pests and disease (60%). Some possibilities and innovations that could address these problems are the use and retaining of various indigenous soil and water conservation (SWC) measures, diversified farming systems, community involvement in the government development process, better irrigation facilities, strengthening the local economy, coordinated planning between stakeholders and development of market feedback mechanism within the system.

Suggested Citation

  • Prabuddh Kumar Mishra & Aman Rai & Kamal Abdelrahman & Suresh Chand Rai & Anuj Tiwari, 2021. "Analysing Challenges and Strategies in Land Productivity in Sikkim Himalaya, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:11112-:d:651901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/11112/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/11112/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bjorklund, Johanna & Limburg, Karin E. & Rydberg, Torbjorn, 1999. "Impact of production intensity on the ability of the agricultural landscape to generate ecosystem services: an example from Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 269-291, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nikola Tričković & Vukašin Rončević & Nikola Živanović & Tara Grujić & Luka Stefanović & Nikola Jovanović & Miodrag Zlatić, 2023. "Ecological and Economic Effects of Applying the Future Agricultural Production Structure Model (FAPSMS): The Case Study of the Barička River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Bhawna Negi & Kavita Khatri & Surendra Singh Bargali & Kiran Bargali, 2023. "Invasive Ageratina adenophora (Asteraceae) in Agroecosystems of Kumaun Himalaya, India: A Threat to Plant Diversity and Sustainable Crop Yield," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-21, July.
    3. Qamer Ridwan & Zishan Ahmad Wani & Mohd Hanief & Shreekar Pant & Ali Asghar Shah & Sazada Siddiqui & Saad Alamri, 2023. "Indigenous Knowledge and Perception of Local People towards Biodiversity Conservation in Rajouri District of Jammu and Kashmir, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    2. Saifi, Basim & Drake, Lars, 2008. "Swedish agriculture during the twentieth century in relation to sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 370-380, December.
    3. Lv, Yao & Gu, Shu-zhong & Guo, Dong-mei, 2010. "Valuing environmental externalities from rice-wheat farming in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1436-1442, May.
    4. Veronique Beckers & Jeroen Beckers & Matthias Vanmaercke & Etienne Van Hecke & Anton Van Rompaey & Nicolas Dendoncker, 2018. "Modelling Farm Growth and Its Impact on Agricultural Land Use: A Country Scale Application of an Agent-Based Model," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Dong, Xiaobin & Yang, Weikun & Ulgiati, Sergio & Yan, Maochao & Zhang, Xinshi, 2012. "The impact of human activities on natural capital and ecosystem services of natural pastures in North Xinjiang, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 28-39.
    6. Maxim, Laura & Spangenberg, Joachim H. & O'Connor, Martin, 2009. "An analysis of risks for biodiversity under the DPSIR framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 12-23, November.
    7. Schonhart, Martin & Schauppenlehner, Thomas & Schmid, Erwin, 2010. "Integrated land use modelling of agri-environmental measures to maintain biodiversity at landscape level," 120th Seminar, September 2-4, 2010, Chania, Crete 109401, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Sundkvist, Asa & Milestad, Rebecka & Jansson, AnnMari, 2005. "On the importance of tightening feedback loops for sustainable development of food systems," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 224-239, April.
    9. Maxim, Laura & Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2009. "Driving forces of chemical risks for the European biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 43-54, November.
    10. Danny Campbell & George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2006. "Benefit Estimates For Landscape Improvements: Sequential Bayesian Design And Respondents’ Rationality In A Choice Experiment Study," Working Papers 0606, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    11. Riccardo Scarpa & Danny Campbell & W. George Hutchinson, 2007. "Benefit Estimates for Landscape Improvements: Sequential Bayesian Design and Respondents’ Rationality in a Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 617-634.
    12. Calvet-Mir, Laura & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Reyes-García, Victoria, 2012. "Beyond food production: Ecosystem services provided by home gardens. A case study in Vall Fosca, Catalan Pyrenees, Northeastern Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 153-160.
    13. Renats Trubins, 2023. "Trade-Offs in Ecosystem Services: Clarifying Concepts and Measuring Severity within the Production Possibility Frontier Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-10, December.
    14. Lant, Christopher L. & Kraft, Steven E. & Beaulieu, Jeffrey & Bennett, David & Loftus, Timothy & Nicklow, John, 2005. "Using GIS-based ecological-economic modeling to evaluate policies affecting agricultural watersheds," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 467-484, December.
    15. Sha Chen & Guan Li & Zhongguo Xu & Yuefei Zhuo & Cifang Wu & Yanmei Ye, 2019. "Combined Impact of Socioeconomic Forces and Policy Implications: Spatial-Temporal Dynamics of the Ecosystem Services Value in Yangtze River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-22, May.
    16. Haozhe Zhang & Qingyuan Yang & Zhongxun Zhang & Dan Lu & Huiming Zhang, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Changes of Ecosystem Service Value Determined by National Land Space Pattern Change: A Case Study of Fengdu County in The Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-24, May.
    17. Knoche, Scott & Lupi, Frank, 2007. "Valuing deer hunting ecosystem services from farm landscapes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 313-320, December.
    18. Maes, Joachim & Liquete, Camino & Teller, Anne & Erhard, Markus & Paracchini, Maria Luisa & Barredo, José I. & Grizzetti, Bruna & Cardoso, Ana & Somma, Francesca & Petersen, Jan-Erik & Meiner, Andrus , 2016. "An indicator framework for assessing ecosystem services in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 14-23.
    19. Limburg, Karin E. & O'Neill, Robert V. & Costanza, Robert & Farber, Stephen, 2002. "Complex systems and valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 409-420, June.
    20. Bachev, Hrabrin & Ivanov, Bojidar & Mitova, Dilyana & Boevski, Ivan & Marinov, Petar & Todorova, Kristina & Mitov, Anton, 2020. "Методически Въпроси На Икономическото Изучаване На Услугите На Агроекоситемите [Methodological issues of economic studies on agro-ecosystem services]," MPRA Paper 98408, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:11112-:d:651901. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.