IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/soudev/v16y2021i3p414-432.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Judicial Fix for Forest Loss: The Godavarman Case and the Financialization of India’s Forests

Author

Listed:
  • Manju Menon
  • Kanchi Kohli

Abstract

In India, the setting up of large projects in forest areas can be undertaken only after government permission is obtained under the Forest (Conservation) Act (FCA) of 1980. Today, this approval process includes the enumeration and valuation of forest loss, and the financing of compensatory afforestation schemes to offset the loss. These procedures were designed through the orders and judgements of the Supreme Court of India in a set of cases that started in 1995 and continue to this day. These procedures are purportedly aimed to protect and restore forest ecologies in India. In this article we analyse the Supreme Court’s processes and orders between 1996 and 2006 which transformed the political ecology of forests in India. The judicial and expert discourses treated forest regulation and conservation as a techno-managerial exercise, separating it from social-ecological concerns such as historical dispossession of Adivasis and other forest-dependent people, and violent state suppression of diverse forms of forest management. The judicial interventions are instructive to understand the policy processes of green neoliberalism and the implications of the financialization of forests on environmental governance in India.

Suggested Citation

  • Manju Menon & Kanchi Kohli, 2021. "The Judicial Fix for Forest Loss: The Godavarman Case and the Financialization of India’s Forests," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 16(3), pages 414-432, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:soudev:v:16:y:2021:i:3:p:414-432
    DOI: 10.1177/09731741211061968
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09731741211061968
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09731741211061968?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. World Bank, 2005. "India : Unlocking Opportunities for Forest-Dependent People in India, Volume 1, Main Report," World Bank Publications - Reports 8416, The World Bank Group.
    2. Jean Dreze, 2005. "Tribal Evictions From Forest Land," Working Papers id:201, eSocialSciences.
    3. World Bank, 2005. "India : Unlocking Opportunities for Forest-Dependent People in India, Volume 2, Appendixes," World Bank Publications - Reports 8414, The World Bank Group.
    4. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    5. Joe Weston, 2004. "EIA in a risk society," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(2), pages 313-325.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bošković, Branko & Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Pelli, Martino & Risch, Anna, 2023. "The effect of forest access on the market for fuelwood in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    2. Boskovic, Branko & Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Pelli, Martino & Risch, Anna, 2018. "The Effect of Forest Access on the Market for Fuelwood in India," TSE Working Papers 18-925, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    3. Damania, Richard & Joshi, Anupam & Russ, Jason, 2020. "India’s forests – Stepping stone or millstone for the poor?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    4. N C B Nath, 2008. "Suggesting Effective Policy Frames for Chronic Poverty Alleviation in India," Working Papers id:1804, eSocialSciences.
    5. Smita Gupta, 2024. "Deregulation as Disempowerment: Dispossessing Local Forest-dwelling Communities in India," Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, Centre for Agrarian Research and Education for South, vol. 13(4), pages 439-461, December.
    6. Hendrawan, Dienda C P & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Oil Palm Smallholder Farmers' Livelihood Resilience and Decision Making in Replanting," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322441, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    8. Tania Pinto & Telmo Machado & Diana Nicolau & Nuno Gaspar Oliveira & Ana Sofia Vaz, 2024. "Accounting for nature contributions to people in corporate sustainability: The case of a waste management company in Portugal," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 2619-2628, July.
    9. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    10. Mohd Azmeer Abu Bakar & Asyirah Abdul Rahim & Norhayati Mat Ghani & Mohd Aiman Mohd Asri & Noor Janatun Naim Jemali & Cik Nur Kyariatul Syafinie Abdul Majid, 2024. "Importance of Forest Services in the Provision of Water Sources to the State of Penang, Peninsular Malaysia," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(10), pages 801-812, October.
    11. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    12. Bojie Wang & Haiping Tang & Qin Zhang & Fengqi Cui, 2020. "Exploring Connections among Ecosystem Services Supply, Demand and Human Well-Being in a Mountain-Basin System, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    14. Fan, Fan & Henriksen, Christian Bugge & Porter, John, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services in organic cereal crop production systems with different management practices in relation to organic matter input," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 117-127.
    15. Salisu Barau, Aliyu & Stringer, Lindsay C., 2015. "Access to and allocation of ecosystem services in Malaysia's Pulau Kukup Ramsar Site," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 167-173.
    16. Heink, Ulrich & Jax, Kurt, 2019. "Going Upstream — How the Purpose of a Conceptual Framework for Ecosystem Services Determines Its Structure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 264-271.
    17. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Alexey Dushin, 2022. "Valuating Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services: Systematic Review of Methods in Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    18. Brathwaite, Angelique & Pascal, Nicolas & Clua, Eric, 2021. "When are payment for ecosystems services suitable for coral reef derived coastal protection?: A review of scientific requirements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    19. Marie Balková & Lucie Kubalíková & Marcela Prokopová & Petr Sedlák & Aleš Bajer, 2021. "Ecosystem Services of Vegetation Features as the Multifunction Anti-Erosion Measures in the Czech Republic in 2019 and Its 30-Year Prediction," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    20. Brill, Gregg & Anderson, Pippin & O'Farrell, Patrick, 2017. "Urban national parks in the global South: Linking management perceptions, policies and practices to water-related ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 185-195.

    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:sae:soudev:v:16:y:2021:i:3:p:414-432. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.