IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/decisn/v46y2019i4d10.1007_s40622-019-00224-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Human–wildlife conflicts in the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve and the politics of forest conservation

Author

Listed:
  • Amrita Sen

    (Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to identify the politics of forest conservation—processes through which formal stewardship methods are legally enforced circumventing customary community rights to the forests. Drawing on an ethnographic fieldwork conducted in the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve of West Bengal, this paper discusses the ways in which such bureaucratic provisions of forest conservation shapes ideologies about human–wildlife conflicts in India. The paper draws on empirical lessons and provides observations on the different kinds of forest notifications and their impacts on the customary rights of the forest-dependent communities in the Sundarbans. Although it has been widely established that forest conservation adversely impacts local livelihoods and results in dispossession from subsistence resources, it is indeed imperative to understand that in legitimising forested landscapes as ‘protected’ and inviolate, survival of different communities is also at stake.

Suggested Citation

  • Amrita Sen, 2019. "Human–wildlife conflicts in the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve and the politics of forest conservation," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 46(4), pages 321-333, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:decisn:v:46:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s40622-019-00224-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s40622-019-00224-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40622-019-00224-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40622-019-00224-7?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amrita Sen & Sarmistha Pattanaik, 2019. "The political agenda of implementing Forest Rights Act 2006: evidences from Indian Sundarban," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 2355-2376, October.
    2. John Richards & Elizabeth Flint, 1990. "Long-term transformations in the Sundarbans wetlands forests of Bengal," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 7(2), pages 17-33, March.
    3. Robert Fletcher, 2012. "Using the Master's Tools? Neoliberal Conservation and the Evasion of Inequality," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 295-317, January.
    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. Sumana Banerjee & Abhra Chanda & Tuhin Ghosh & Emilie Cremin & Fabrice G. Renaud, 2023. "A Qualitative Assessment of Natural and Anthropogenic Drivers of Risk to Sustainable Livelihoods in the Indian Sundarban," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-27, April.

    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. Andreas Scheba, 2018. "Market-Based Conservation for Better Livelihoods? The Promises and Fallacies of REDD+ in Tanzania," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Loivaranta, Tikli, 2023. "Geographies of knowledge creation in forest rights claims-making processes among Indigenous communities in Central India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    3. Fletcher, Robert & Büscher, Bram, 2017. "The PES Conceit: Revisiting the Relationship between Payments for Environmental Services and Neoliberal Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 224-231.
    4. George Holmes, 2015. "Markets, Nature, Neoliberalism, and Conservation through Private Protected Areas in Southern Chile," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(4), pages 850-866, April.
    5. Julie A. Silva & Nicole Motzer, 2015. "Hybrid Uptakes of Neoliberal Conservation in Namibian Tourism-based Development," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 46(1), pages 48-71, January.
    6. Osterhoudt, Sarah & Galvin, Shaila Seshia & Graef, Dana J. & Saxena, Alder Keleman & Dove, Michael R., 2020. "Chains of Meaning: Crops, commodities, and the ‘in-between’ spaces of trade," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    7. Benra, Felipe & Nahuelhual, Laura, 2019. "A trilogy of inequalities: Land ownership, forest cover and ecosystem services distribution," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 247-257.
    8. Ana Filipa Ferreira & Heike Zimmermann & Rui Santos & Henrik von Wehrden, 2020. "Biosphere Reserves’ Management Effectiveness—A Systematic Literature Review and a Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-32, July.
    9. Sumana Banerjee & Abhra Chanda & Tuhin Ghosh & Emilie Cremin & Fabrice G. Renaud, 2023. "A Qualitative Assessment of Natural and Anthropogenic Drivers of Risk to Sustainable Livelihoods in the Indian Sundarban," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-27, April.
    10. Sarkhel, Prasenjit, 2015. "Flood risk, land use and private participation in embankment maintenance in Indian Sundarbans," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 272-284.
    11. Eero Palmujoki & Pekka Virtanen, 2016. "Global, National, or Market? Emerging REDD+ Governance Practices in Mozambique and Tanzania," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(1), pages 59-78, February.
    12. Sarah R. Osterhoudt, 2018. "Community Conservation and the (Mis)appropriation of Taboo," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 49(5), pages 1248-1267, September.
    13. Harvey S. James, 2023. "Agriculture and human values at 40 years: reflections on its scale and scope," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 25-30, March.

    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:spr:decisn:v:46:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s40622-019-00224-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.