JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. This content downloaded from 137.ABSTRACT. This paper disusses domestic energy supply and demand in rural India. Links between forest scarcity and household fuel collection are analyzed in a non-separable household model, focusing on substitution of non-commercial fuels from the commons and the private domain. Based on data from villages bordering a protected area, a novel maximum entropy approach is used for estimation. It is found that households respond to forest scarcity and increased fuelwood collection time by substituting fuels from private sources for forest fuelwood. However, the magnitude of the response appears insufficient to prevent current fuelwood collection practices from causing serious forest degradation. (JEL Q24) I. INTRODUCTIONFuelwood gathered from the forested commons is the most important source of domestic energy in the rural areas of many developing countries (Cecelski, Dunkerley, and Ramsey 1979). About half the world's population cook with biomass fuels, which provide around 35% of energy supplies in the developing countries (World Bank 1992). Fuelwood collection and consumption are intricately linked to natural resource management. There is a two-way relationship between fuelwood collection and deforestation. On the one hand, demand for fuelwood from commons and forests causes resource degradation to the extent that collection exceeds sustainable yield. Forest degradation, on the other hand, leads to a situation of fuelwood scarcity. Indeed, a mounting global "fuelwood crisis" has been envisaged (Dewees 1989). In addition, there are a number of other adverse consequences of forest degradation, including loss of biodiversity, deterioration of watershed management functions, release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and soil erosion.Alternative sources of rural domestic energy-crop residues, animal dung, wood from trees on the farm, biogas, kerosene and sun and wind power-do not cause forest degradation. Substitution from fuelwood to these alternative sources can reduce pressure on natural forests. In addition, more widespread use of improved stoves, biogas, and other improved end-use technologies through reduced energy input requirements also has the potential to reduce pressure on forest resources. The same can be said about improved functioning of local natural resource management institutions and efforts at promoting "participatory" and "joint" forest management. Thus, a better understanding of the determinants of rural household's fuel substitution and adoption of improved energy conversion technologies is essential for informing forest policies and programs.Few rigorous empirical studies have been done on the determinants of fuelwood demand an...

Wild animals often destroy standing crops and prey on livestock, causing economic losses to farmers. Crop and wildlife damage are becoming serious for many Indian protected areas, and this study aimed to characterize the problem in villages in and around the Sariska Tiger Reserve (STR), Rajasthan, India. Data were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire in 37 villages followed by a semi-structured questionnaire administered to 180 households, quadrat sampling and focus group discussions. Crop and livestock depredation evidently affected nearly half of the households in villages adjacent to the STR, but damage varied considerably amongst villages and with distance from the Reserve border. Wild animal distribution and protection measures which people adopted also influenced the damage. Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus() and wild boar ((Sus scrofa() were reported to be responsible for at least half of the total damage to the major crops caused by wild animals. Tigers and leopards were the main livestock predators; the former preyed mostly on larger livestock and the latter on smaller animals such as goats and sheep. More than two-thirds of the villagers spent considerable time and money guarding crops and protecting livestock. Guarding was the most popular means followed by physical fences around fields. In spite of damage to crops and livestock, the local people still had a positive attitude towards the STR, because of tangible benefits derived from the Reserve in terms of fodder and fuelwood, and cultural/religious attitudes towards wild animals. Settlement of rights to collect fuelwood and fodder within the Reserve appears to be one acceptable measure to compensate for losses besides an immediate review of hunting policy. Suggestions given by local people to minimize losses have implications for the long term sustainability of the STR as a protected area.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract