Population Growth and the Decline of Common Property Resources in Rajasthan, India

Jodha, N. S.

doi:10.2307/1973488

Cited by 154 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Throughout Rajasthan local landlords (jagirdars and zamindars) owned and regulated the use of forests and commons, for example by levying a number of taxes on villagers' consumption of forest produce (Jodha, 1985;Shanmugaratnam, 1996). Today, the Reserve is managed by the State Wildlife Department.…”

Section: The State As Resource Manager-the Reserve Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants and impact of local institutions for common resource management

Heltberg¹

2001

Envir. Dev. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. In this article, local institutions for forest conservation and management are analysed. The discussion is based on data from 37 villages and 180 households randomly sampled from a protected area in Rajasthan, India. Local management institutions are described, factors affecting inter-village differences in management institutions and collective action are analysed in a logit model, and the impact of institutions and other variables on common resource dependency and forest outcomes is tested using instrumental variable regression. Village population size has a positive effect and prior institutional experience a negative effect on the probability of collective action. It is concluded that efforts at improving forest management should not be confined to the poorest farmers. Large landowners are heavily involved in degrading use practises, especially when resources have good market potential. Local management institutions play a positive role in the area, but their impact appears insufficient to safeguard forests and commons from continued degradation. Conservation policies should target win-win options through interventions aimed at improving technologies for private and common lands as well as institutional changes.

show abstract

Section: The State As Resource Manager-the Reserve Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants and impact of local institutions for common resource management

Heltberg¹

2001

Envir. Dev. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the past, central research questions have focussed on three issues: the extent an ecological resource base attracts migrants (Bilsborrow and Ogendo, 1992;Bremner and Perez, 2002;Curran, 2002;Dwyer and Minnegal, 1999;Hunter, 1998;Ruilai, 1992); the extent migrants differ from non-migrants in their ecologically destructive behavior (Bilsborrow and Ogendo, 1992;Bilsborrow, 1992;Pichon, 1997;Sierra, 1999); and the extent the capacity of social institutions is strained by migrant incorporation and serves as a more proximate explanation for resource degradation (Bernacsek, 1986;Bertram, 1986;Bilsborrow and DeLargy, 1991;Bilsborrow and Carr, 2000;Connell, 1994;Connell and Conway, 2000;DeWalt and Rees, 1994;Dwyer and Minnegal, 1999;Ewell and Poleman, 1980;Gould, 1994;Jodha, 1985;Katz, 2000;McIntosh, 1993;Ostrom, 1990). As mentioned earlier, most of these studies have examined the impact of migration on the terrestrial environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Migrants Degrade Coastal Environments? Migration, Natural Resource Extraction and Poverty in North Sulawesi, Indonesia

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent literature on migration and the environment has identified key mediating variables such as how migrants extract resources from the environment for their livelihoods, the rate and efficiency of extraction, and the social and economic context within which their extraction occurs. This paper investigates these variables in a new ecological setting using data from coastal fishing villages in North Sulawesi, Indonesia. We do not find as many differences between migrant and non-migrant families regarding destructive fishing behavior, technology, and investment as might have been expected from earlier theories. Instead, the context and timing of migrant assimilation seems to be more important in explaining apparent associations of migration and environmental impacts than simply migrants themselves. This finding fits well with recent literature in the field of international migration and immigrant incorporation.

show abstract

“…Consistent with the growing theoretical literature, there is a large amount of empirical research, especially in India, dealing with poverty, inequality and the dependence of rural households on CPRs (Jodha, 1985(Jodha, , 1986(Jodha, , 1990(Jodha, , 1995Iyengar, 1989;Beck, 1994Beck, , 1998Singh et al, 1996;Iyengar and Shukla, 1999). Beck and Nesmith (2001) note that CPRs currently contribute some USD 5 billion a year to the income of poor rural households in India, or about 12% to the household income of poorer households.…”

Section: Poverty Heterogeneity and Common Property Resource Usementioning

confidence: 98%

Common Property Resource Management

2010

Encyclopedia of Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population Growth and the Decline of Common Property Resources in Rajasthan, India

Cited by 154 publications

References 2 publications

Determinants and impact of local institutions for common resource management

Determinants and impact of local institutions for common resource management

Do Migrants Degrade Coastal Environments? Migration, Natural Resource Extraction and Poverty in North Sulawesi, Indonesia

Common Property Resource Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About