The Woodfuel Scenario and Policy Issues in India

Summary of Recommendations for Different Categories of Lands

Rapid expansion of forestry programmes has taken place in India in the last two decades without the growth of systematic knowledge about how and why they affect rural people. Because of a lack of clarity about the likely outcomes of the policy, neither of the two initiatives taken by the government in the last two decades - industrial plantations on forest lands and social forestry on village lands - were able to stop the degradation of India's natural forests, or to provide more fuelwood to the rural people. The success of farm forestry has certainly brought prices down, but still the poor satisfy their needs through gathering and do not budget for fuel. The present document, written as a supplementary reader for trainees at the National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, seeks to review the existing policy and implementation issues, and makes practical recommendations for improving the availability of woodfuel to the poor. These are summarized in this section for different categories of lands.

Forest lands

• Between Revenue and Forest lands, the latter should get a higher priority for funds. Compared with departmental forestry on Revenue lands, they have obvious advantages of scale and protection. The ambiguities of ownership which have plagued social forestry would not apply. Forest soils are generally better than the soils on Revenue lands. Costs would be lower. Also, the morale of the Forest Department would be higher, since the trees would be planted in territory they are familiar with.

  The two main components of afforestation - farm forestry and afforestation of degraded forest lands - should have different objectives and approaches. Farm forestry and agroforestry should aim at maximizing sustained economic returns from land, whereas public forestry should aim at maximizing welfare through production of such commodities as fuelwood, fodder and NTFPs, which are needed by the people. The choice of species, though subject to agroclimatic and technical considerations, would also be different for the two programmes. Short-duration exotics, which give high market value, would be suitable for farm forestry, whereas species which have their value in the crown and not in the stem would be suitable for public forestry.

• As timber is a product of the dead tree, whereas people collect branches for fuel from living trees, allowing the stem to perform its various environmental functions, and as gathering is more labour-intensive than mechanized clear-felling, fuelwood-based forestry would be more sustainable than timber-based forestry in poor regions.

• This would be reversing the traditional perception of what is the main product and what is the by-product, so choice of species and management should be radically changed to suit the new policy. From forest lands, leaves, twigs and dead wood should become the main intended products, and timber would be a by-product from large multipurpose trees. For quick benefits to the poor, long-gestation trees should be supplemented with an understorey of bushes and shrubs, which could satisfy their immediate needs. Multiple objectives to maximize outputs from many products will require innovative and experimental silviculture, which must focus more on the management of shrub and herb layers, and on forest floor management to enrich the soil and encourage natural regeneration.

• In Joint Forest Management (JFM) areas, settlement and usufruct rights should be reviewed in order to put them in harmony with the care-and-share philosophy which is the basis of JFM.

Revenue lands

• The FD's present practice of taking over common lands should be stopped, or drastically reduced to experimental projects. Funds for afforestation should be transferred to the village community. The role of the Forest Department would be mainly extension and technical support.

• Generally, only a small area of Revenue land is available in each village. If afforestation were left to the panchayat, it would take up only a small portion of this, and plenty of land would be left for use by the poor for grazing.

• Where panchayats represent several villages, single-village organizations should be created. Finally, distribution of produce is better done on the basis of one household: one share.

• Model afforestation schemes should be prepared for implementation by the panchayats. These should be widely circulated, and panchayats should be encouraged to apply for funds.

• Often degraded lands are available in larger chunks, but these are not taken up as the cost of reclamation would be high. However, in the long run, it is better to afforest these, as they have better demonstration effect, satisfy local demand and offer better management possibilities.

• Extremely degraded lands are best suited for undertaking fuelwood plantations using species like prosopis. Research should be undertaken to develop a thornless variety so as to facilitate gathering.

Farm Forestry

• Private forestry requires security of land and tree tenure, and secure access to markets. The restrictive laws on harvesting, movement and sale of forest products must be abolished.

• The government should stop subsidies on its own supply of wood to industries, thereby forcing industry to buy from the farmers at a realistic price. The new Forest Policy endorses this suggestion, but in many states, subsidies still continue. Since the demand for marketed wood in India is limited, by duplicating the same species on Forest lands and on farm lands, such as eucalyptus, we are ultimately cutting into the farmers' profits, and thus undermining the farm forestry programme itself. Also, from lops and tops of farm trees, wood for fuel would be produced.

• Farmers should have a range of other short-rotation, high-value species beside eucalyptus and acacia on their land, which meet their various needs and spread the risk to their income from the collapse of any one market. The economics of each model should be worked out for several years ahead. Diversification of species would also be better for the environment.

• New uses of wood should be promoted, such as power generation via gasification. This would improve the profitability of wood production on degraded farm lands.

• Administrative and legal controls over charcoal making from prosopis should be removed, as the activity does not lead to deforestation and is labour intensive.

Finally, the main barriers to afforestation in India are institutional: those concerning empowerment of local communities, proper land and product tenure to them, and involvement in decision making (Saxena,1995). These issues deserve urgent attention.

Back to the top

Table of Contents