The Paradox of Development: Forest Rights, Mining and Displacement in Odisha, India

 

Debasree Chatterjee^1,4, Debajit Datta², Mrinmoyee Naskar³

¹Department of Political Science, SGB College, Mogra-712148, West Bengal, India

²Department of Geography, Jadavpur University, Kolkata-700032, West Bengal, India

³Department of Geography, Baruipur College, Baruipur-743610, West Bengal, India

⁴Department of International Relations, Jadavpur University, Kolkata-700032, West Bengal, India

 

ABSTRACT:

Industrialization is indispensible for the economic growth of the developing countries like India. Richness in mineral resources gives considerable impetus in the developmental processes and mineral enriched areas often become promising locations for industrial growth. In India, mineral rich regions are coincidentally juxtaposed with vast tracts of natural forest, characterized by endemic biodiversity as well as high concentration of tribal populace. The Indian government had acknowledged the right to access the forests through implementation of various acts in the post independence period but the existing policy gaps had often violated these rights. Contradictions in legislations regarding forest conservation and land acquisition had often failed to safeguard the rights of the tribes causing conflicts of interest between tribal groups and government which in turn hindered the holistic developmental goal. Developmental project induced displacement in Odisha had exacerbated the predicament of the forest dwelling communities. Negligence towards the rights of the local community in many cases engendered resistance against the developmental initiatives creating hindrance towards holistic development. Against this backdrop, the present study seeks to shed light on the nature of developmental initiatives in Odisha as well as their effects on the local communities.

 

 

 

1. INTRODUCTION:

India is endowed with vast reserves of minerals and it is the top most producers of some of the major minerals like coal, iron ore, chromite and bauxite. Minerals are imperative for economic growth of a country but unfortunately the mineral repository in India is located within the vast tracts of forests. These forests are rich in biodiversity and are inhabited by the country’s marginalized people – the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) who depend on forests and forest based resources for their livelihood. 

 

 

India has a teeming tribal population of 84.3 million approximately who dwell mostly in the mineral rich regions of the country. The presence of large number of tribes in the mineral rich areas are recognized by the government but the emergence of mining industries and other developmental projects in these regions in the post liberalization period had degenerated the environment (Bhushan et al., 2008).

 

The mining industries across the globe had strengthened their position by portraying a pro-poor approach. Mining was conceived as an avenue to promote growth in the backward areas which in turn will improve the conditions of the local people particularly the tribes but in reality the scenario is completely opposite. Large tracts of lands lie in the remote corners of rural India where developmental projects were undertaken in the name of national interest and upliftment of the local marginalized people. In India, states like Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Odisha which has high concentration of mineral resources exhibit low per capita income followed by higher rates of poverty, mortality, malnutrition, morbidity and low growth rates. The resource extraction policy which had failed to provide a holistic developmental approach led to the sluggish growth rate and underdevelopment in these areas (Pattanaik, undated; Bhushan et al., 2008).

 

Odisha following the footsteps of other Indian states invited mining corporations but mining activities portrayed adverse effects on the natural ecosystems of the region. The degeneration of forests, pollution in the water bodies and alienation of local populace from their lands leading to loss of livelihood emerged when the mining sector took a center stage in the state. The Scheduled Tribe and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (hereafter FRA) is the sole legislation which recognizes the livelihood rights of the tribes and other forest dwellers living in and around the forests for generations but whose rights have not been recorded so far. The process of implementation of FRA became tardy in the state due to controversial displacements which took place mostly due to launch of developmental projects (Pattanaik, undated). Against this backdrop, the present paper seeks to explore the nature of developmental projects undertaken in Odisha. The paper also focuses on the effects of these projects on the local people.

 

2. STUDY AREA:

Odisha is located in the eastern coast of India enriched with huge deposits of natural resources, bountiful forests, bio-diversity and a protracted coastline (Figure 1). It constitutes 7% of India’s forests and 30% of the state is under forest cover which is a source of livelihood to a large number of tribal population of the state. Odisha accounts for 22.85% tribal population occupying third position (numerically) in the country in terms of STs as per 2011 census (Government of Odisha, 2017; Patra et. al, 2008). The state hosts 62 tribal communities which includes 13 primitive groups. Tribal groups like Juang, Bondo and Bhuiyan are found only in the state of Odisha. Districts like Malkangiri, Koraput, Nawarangpur, Rayagada, Kalahandi, Gajapati, Phulbani, Mayurbhanj, Sundergarh and Sambalpur are inhabited mostly by the tribes (Pandey, 2008).

 

Figure 1: Location of the study sites

 

Growth in both industrial and agricultural sectors was prioritized by governments under different regimes in the state since 1950s. The concept of increase in agricultural production without depending on the traditional practices for production became the cardinal feature of the state’s policy particularly after the Green Revolution. The industrial sector was controlled by the state till the country embarked upon the economic reforms in 1990s. A paradigm shift occurred in the post liberalization period when the resources of the state are opened up before the national and international private sectors. The Government of Odisha had signed Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) with 93 industrial houses primarily ranging in the sectors of steel, power and cement along with investment in ports and downstream units. The notion of rapid industrialization propelled the government to sign MoUs which ensured steady investment but at the cost of extraction of mineral resources. Ironically, mineral deposits are located in the remotest parts of Odisha which are mostly forest areas and inhabited by the culturally diverse tribal groups. The extraction of mineral resources and establishment of industries in these areas led to the destruction of ecology and displacement of the local inhabitants. The maximum investment was done by the iron and steel companies (Business Standard, 2014; Mishra, 2013).

 

3. LEGISLATIONS SAFEGUARDING TRIBAL RIGHTS TO LAND AND FORESTS:

The colonial rule marked the areas dominated by the tribes as ‘excluded’ and ‘partially excluded’ driven by the idea of separate administration for the tribes. The penetration of the administrative control in the remotest tribal areas during British rule fomented several resistances which were suppressed brutally by the British army. The colonial rulers and the princely states in order to maximize the revenue spread their administrative power in the tribal areas which enjoyed economic and political autonomy in the pre-British era. The rulers promoted settlement of non-tribal tenure holders who were engaged in settled cultivation rather than shifting cultivation done by the tribes of the hills. The colonial rulers and the princely estates notified several areas as forests and reserved it which eventually denied the rights of the forest dwellers particularly the tribes. Land and forest administration became steady in the post independence period in Odisha with the proclamation of several legislations. The Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1952 repealed the system of intermediary tenure holders and the state obtained the legitimate rights of the land (Table 1). The Orissa Tenant Reforms Act, 1955, the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960, the Orissa Transfer of Immovable Property Regulation 2 of 1956 was promulgated to safeguard the rights of the impoverished and landless populace. The Orissa Forest Act, 1972 provided a systematic framework for forest governance followed by the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (Kumar and Choudhary, 2005).

 

The Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act or PESA was enacted by the Government of India (GOI) in 1996 for covering the “scheduled areas” which were not covered in the 73rd Amendment Act of 1992. The Act extended the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution of India relating to the Panchayats and the Scheduled Areas.

 

Table 1: Timeline of Implementation of Major Legislations for Forest Governance in Post Independent Odisha

Name of the Legislation	Year of Introducing Legislation	Basic Provision (s)
The Orissa Preservation of Private Forests Act	1947	The Act curbed the power of the forest owners particularly rulers of the princely states. Disallowed sell, mortgage, lease and alienation of whole or any part of the forest area without prior sanction of the Provincial government
The Orissa Communal Forest and Private Lands (Prohibition of Alienation), Act	1948	The Act came into force in the whole state of Odisha except the district of Sambalpur. The Act restricted sell, mortgage, lease, alienation of any communal forest or private land or conversion into raiyati land and prohibited creation of occupancy rights without prior sanction of the collector.
The Indian Forest (Orissa Amendment), Act	1954	This Act implemented the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 in Odisha. The promulgation of this Act declared that any forest land or waste land in the merged territories which had been declared by the ruler of any merged state before the date of merger as a reserved forest in pursuance of any law, custom, rule, regulation, order or notification shall be regarded as reserved forest for the purpose of this Act
The Orissa Forest Act	1972	The Orissa Forest Act, 1972 was proclaimed on the basis of the Indian Forest Act 1927. This Act took the initiative of uniformly managing the forests in the state. The dual objectives of revenue maximization and fulfilling the commercial and industrial needs failed to secure tenure of the forest dwelling communities. The Act reformulated the forests into three categories viz. Reserved Forests, Village Forests and Protected Forests The right to access the forests was restricted and podu (shifting cultivation) became inappropriate.
The Orissa Village Forest Rules	1985	The first major attempt to decentralize forest governance by recognizing legally local level committees known as Village Forest Protection Committees  (VFPCs).
The National Forest Policy	1988	The decentralized forest governance evolved with the Second National Forest Policy which ensured participation of local populace in the protection, regeneration and management of forests. The policy also provided usufruct rights and profit sharing.
Joint Forest Management Resolution	1990 and 1993	The GOI issued orders of JFM in 1990 as a follow-up to National Forest Policy of 1988. It consolidated the process of decentralized forest management by delegating the authority to the local level institutions. The Government of Odisha issued a resolution in 1993 in response to the resolution by GOI making the management of forests more transparent.
The Orissa Gram Panchayats (Minor Forest Produce Administration) Rules	2002	The implementation of this rule brought an end to the centralized management of NTFPs. The Gram Panchayat was empowered to play a greater role in the procurement and trading of minor forest products produced in the government lands and forests within the purview of village area or collected from the Reserved Forests
The Forest Right Act	2006	Implementation of Forest Rights Act began in Odisha in 2008 with coordination of four Departments viz. Tribal Welfare, Forest, Revenue and Panchayat. The Act was primarily focused on providing individual rights in Odisha. The Act recognized and vested rights and occupation in forest lands to the forest dwelling STs and other traditional forest dwellers.

Source: The Orissa Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1947; The Orissa Communal Forest and Private Lands (Prohibition of Alienation) Act, 1948; The Indian Forest (Orissa amendment) Act, 1954; Rout, 2003; Sarap, 2004; Sarap, 2007; Government of Odisha, Forest and Environment Department, 2008; Datta and Chatterjee, 2012; Mohapatra, 2014; Sarap and Sarangi, 2016; Odisha Forest Development Corporation, 2017

 

 

 

According to the Fifth Schedule, there are specific provisions for administering the tribal areas of the country except the northeastern region. Several cases were filed in the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Odisha and Maharashtra and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh declared that extension of the Panchayat Act, 1994 to the scheduled areas is ultra vires to the constitution. The judicial verdict and the agitation of the political parties, tribal leaders and several organizations led to the implementation of the PESA in 1996. It became imperative in the states falling under the Fifth Schedule viz. Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Odisha to make their existing panchayat acts along the lines of PESA within a year from its date of implementation. The Gram Sabhas are endowed with the power to manage the natural resources as well as to formulate and supervise the programmes for socio-economic development. PESA also clearly pointed out that Gram Sabhas are entrusted with the task of restraining land alienation and forcible land acquisition in the scheduled areas (Pal, 2000; Mukul, 1997).

 

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. FRA recognized a wide range of individual and community rights of the forest dwelling communities who have been living in such forests for generations but whose rights have not been recorded. The Act was enacted in 2006 and it came into operation on 1^st January, 2008. The FRA was enacted with the objective of rectifying the ‘historical injustice’ done to the tribes and other forest dwellers through the forest policies both in the colonial and post independence period (Jain and Sharma, 2015).

 

4. LAND ACQUISITION VS PROTESTS:

The fear of displacement through the developmental projects had led to the violent protests by the local villagers in the state of Odisha. Three most controversial developmental projects launched in recent years and the reactions of the local people are discussed below.

 

I. Industrial Hub of Kalinganagar:

Kalinganagar was touted as the new industrial hub of the state in the 1990s particularly due to the availability of the chromite from the nearby mines of Kaliapani, Kalarangi, Saruabila and Sukurangi and iron ore from the mines of Tamaka of Jajpur district. The close proximity of the chromite reserves in the neighbouring districts of Dhenkanal and Keonjhar, availability of water from the river Bramhani which is the second largest river of Odisha and two national highways linking Kalinganagar with Kolkata and Chennai led the state government to conceive the place as the new industrial destination. The strategic location of Kalinganagar mobilized the companies like TISCO, VISA industries, Jindal Stainless, Maharashtra Seamless, MAL industries, AML Steel and Power, National Steel and Power, National Steel and Agro Industries, Tube Investment India, Dinabandhu Steel and Uttam Galva Steels to sign MoUs with the state government (Pandey, 2008).

 

The two blocks of Sukinda and Danagadi under which the area falls is highly concentrated by the STs and SCs. The Industrial Development Corporation Odisha (IDCO) undertook the responsibility of developing infrastructures for the proposed industrial hub and in the process acquired lands during 1992-1993. The government transferred only a portion of the acquired lands to the industries as downtrend in the global steel market led to a halt in the investment by the industrial houses who signed MoU with the state. The rest of the land was still with the people who continued to cultivate it like before. Tata Steel signed MoU in 2004 for establishing a steel plant with a production capacity of six million tonnes per annum and an investment of Rs. 15, 40, 00 million (Dash and Samal, 2008). The state government while developing Kalinganagar Industrial Complex neglected the local populace who were mostly tribes. In the initial years, the people of the area were not against the projects as they were guided by the belief that advent of industries would give them economic security by providing them employment. The compensation for the land acquired by IDCO was accepted but the agitation ensued when the displacement process started in 1997. The displaced people of MESCO, Jindal and NINL refused to shift to the resettlement colonies set up in Trijanga and Gobarghati. The agitation escalated in 2006 when Tata Steel started leveling the ground for setting up their proposed plant and villagers of three panchayats viz. Chandia, Gobarghati and Gadapur were set to be displaced (Pandey, 2008; Dash and Samal, 2008).

 

Large number of people mostly tribes protested against the Tatas with their traditional weapons and 12 tribal people were killed during the confrontation between the protestors and the police. The discontent rose when it was found that IDCO sold land to Tatas and other industries at five times higher rates than the compensation provided to the land owners. The resentment erupted as the government paid no heed to the grievances of the local people, refused to follow a path of reconciliation, instead the administration of the affected districts safeguarded the industrial houses (Dash and Samal, 2008).

 

II. Vedanta Project in Lanjigarh:

Vedanta Alumina Limited, a subsidiary of M/s Sterlite Industries (India) Limited (SIIL) along with Odisha Mining Corporation Limited (OMC) planned to mine large deposits of bauxite located on top of the Niyamgiri Hill situated in the border areas of Kalahandi and Rayagada districts of Odisha. A MoU was signed between SIIL and Government of Odisha in 2003 for establishing an Alumina Complex which includes 1.0 MTPA Alumina Refinery Plant at Lanjigarh, 3.0 MTPA of bauxite mining and 75 MW Captive Power Plant at Lanjigarh with an investment amounting to Rs. 4500 crore. The area selected for proposed mining is a forest land with rich biodiversity and home to 8000 Dongria Kondh tribes dwelling around 90 settlements across the whole area and 2000 Majhi Kondh tribes inhabiting around 10 villages located at the foot of the hills (Marshall and Balaton-Chrimes, 2016; Dash and Samal, 2008).

 

The Dongria Kondh tribes worship Niyamgiri hills and they showed their fury by protesting against the project. Their resentment became publicized through the grassroots organizations like Niyamgiri Suraksha Samiti and international NGOs like Survival International, Action Aid and Amnesty International. The Government of India halted the expansion of Vedanta project at Lanjigarh in 2010 on the ground of violation of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification (Mishra, 2013).

 

III. POSCO:

The government of Odisha signed a MoU with Pohang Steel Company (POSCO), a South Korean steel giant in 2005 for establishing a steel project at Paradip in Jagatsinghpur district. The project was launched in 2011 but it gave rise to resentment among the local villagers out of the fear of displacement and loss of livelihood. In 2005, Posco Pratirodh Sangram Samiti (PPSS), which is a people’s organization against the proposed project, was constituted. The FRA was passed in 2006 and the PPSS pointed out that occupying these lands without the consent of the concerned villagers should be deemed as illegal as the FRA categorized them as “other forest dwellers”. The police attacked the protests organized by the PPSS in 2007. A resolution was passed by the Gram Sabha of Dhinkia (a village in Jagatsinghpur which is situated in the proposed POSCO site) in 2008 in order to implement the FRA. The POSCO’s steel plant was approved by the Forest Advisory Committee in 2009. Around 2900 acres of land falls under forest land cover out of the total 4000 acres of land needed for establishing the project. The government of the state instead of moving the project elsewhere compelled the villagers to accept the rehabilitation package. The N. C. Saxena Committee appointed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) reported that the government of Odisha had violated the FRA through this project (Mishra, 2013).

 

5. PARADOX OF DEVELOPMENT: VIOLATION OF LEGISLATIONS AND DISPLACEMENT:

The Mines and Minerals (Regulations and Development) Act, 1957 controlled the mining industry in India and important minerals like coal, iron ore, manganese, gypsum, gold and diamonds falls for the public sector.  This act was amended twice in 1994 and 1997 in order to make the mining industry more investor-friendly. This amended Act attracted the attention of the foreign investors and most of the mining projects were cleared promptly (Pandey, 2008).

 

Despite having abundant mines, minerals and natural resources, Odisha continued to be one of the most underdeveloped states of the country. In the post independence period, the mining and the big industrial projects were launched in the areas dominated by the tribes. STs constitute 22 % of the total population of the state and they depend not only on the land and forest for their livelihood but share an intrinsic social and cultural bond with the land and forests. The tribal communities were worst affected for decades as they lost fertile lands of the plains to non-tribal populace and hilly lands to the state marked as forest lands or revenue wastelands (Chakrabarty and Kujur, 2010).

 

Several legislations on forests and exploitation of the forests for commercial purposes alienated the tribes from their land and made them ‘encroachers’ in their own ancestral homelands. The Naxalites took advantage of the acute poverty and marginalization and emerged as a rising force in the state. The disenchantment with the idea of development and distrust against the government had consolidated the emergence of the Naxals not only in Odisha but in other mineral rich states like Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. Naxalism is an outlet to the anger caused by deprivation for decades (Bhushan et al., 2008).

 

The developmental projects ranging from industry, irrigation and mining was undertaken to upgrade the economic condition of the state but in the process it had displaced several marginalized families mostly tribes thereby intensifying their predicament (Table 2). The Government of India lacks any specific policy for the tribes even after seventy two years of independence and denied their distinctiveness by trying to fuse them in the mainstream society. The developmental projects instead of upgrading their economic condition pushed them in the vicious cycle of poverty and posed threats to their traditional life style and culture (Pandey, 2008).

 

The striking feature of the movements in Odisha is that it is mostly led by the people who are the victims of the developmental projects. The neighbouring state of West Bengal also witnessed a movement in 2006 when the Tata Motors Limited acquired land at Singur for a proposed car factory.

Table 2: SWOT Analysis of Different Industrial Projects of Odisha

Industrial Project	Strength	Weakness	Opportunity	Threat
Industrial hub of Kalinga nagar	One of the largest Iron and Steel industrial hubs of India	Caused displacement of large number of local populace	Potential to produce huge quantities of iron and steel	Social and political turmoil emerged due to displacement of local people
		Lack of appropriate rehabilitation, employment opportunities, and compensation	Potential employment opportunities for large number of people	Degeneration of  environment and loss of livelihood of local populace
	More than 11 industrial houses established steel industries based on assured steady supply of iron-ore	About 3600 hectares of agricultural lands were encroached from the villagers	Opportunity for the state to earn large revenues	Violation of land rights and livelihood rights of locals particularly the tribes
		Dwindling supply of iron-ore and bauxite from the mines		Reduction in production resulted in unemployment of large number of erstwhile employees
Vedanta	Initiated with highly modernized technology and infrastructure	58.943 hectare of forest land were required for the refinery which consists of 29 hectare of village forest and 30 hectare of reserve forest	Hefty amount of high quality alumina and aluminum could be produced based on local bauxite mines.	Threatened religious rights of the local tribes as they treat these hills as god
				Caused potential threat towards forest ecology and livelihood of local tribals
		Displacement of large number of local people
				Violated the Forest Rights Act 2006
POSCO	Have potential to produce 12 billion ton of steel per year based on local iron- ore	About 1600 hectare of coastal land had been allocated for the project which displaced 2200 people approximately	Created scope of direct foreign investment.	Threatened local economy and livelihood of tribal people
		Caused adverse impacts on ecology and local biodiversity

 

The movement gained attention but became controversial since it was led by the Trinamool Congress, the then opposition party of that state. In contrast, the anti-project movements were successful in Odisha as political obedience did not hinder the unification of the people against the projects. The emergence of Maoism in different districts of Odisha particularly in the proposed project areas is a contentious issue. One school of social scientists pointed out that Maoist activities are predominant in those regions which suffer from acute poverty. Districts like Kalahandi, Balangir and Koraput had witnessed highest number of Maoist activities which are also poorest districts of the state. The other school believes that the government and media are reporting the rise of Maoism in order to muffle the anti-project movements (Mishra, 2010).

 

The FRA recognized the rights of the forest dwellers and empowered the community to protect and manage the forests. Section 5 of the Act provides the community the right to protect wildlife, forests etc. The village communities play a crucial role in the protection and conservation of forests and wildlife from poachers, smugglers, land grabbers and companies. The civil society organizations played a proactive role in the implementation of the Act and claims were submitted for the implementation of the Act. However, the real picture of the implementation of FRA is grim. A significant aspect of the FRA is that the forests dwellers cannot be ousted from their lands without the approval of the Gram Sabhas. The Dongria Kondhs were able to oppose the bauxite mining of the Vedanta group in the Niyamgiri hills taking into account the FRA. The Supreme Court in its historic ruling stated that the Gram Sabha proceedings in the Niyamgiri hills should not be influenced by any company, state government or central government. The Gram Sabhas play a pivotal role in the implementation of the Act and the ruling of the Supreme Court actually recognized the rights of the forest dwellers. The POSCO case however showed violation of the legislation. Dhinkia, Gadakujang and Naogaon are the three most affected Panchayats in Jagatsinghpur which had provided resolutions repeatedly in accordance with the FRA. Previously, the MoEF stated that applications for ‘diversion’ i.e. clearance for non-forest use can be made provided the Gram Sabhas issue certificates but in POSCO case, the MoEF gave final approval to the project flouting this order. This clearance propelled Government of Odisha to acquire lands through coercion for POSCO project. Later the N. C. Saxena Committee report proved the failure of the state government in the implementation of the FRA. Moreover, land acquisition became smooth in Odisha through its policy of Special Economic Zone (SEZ) of 2007 which had relaxed several legal provisions. This had hastened the launch of   developmental projects but the evicted people were not given any land against their original land and were deprived of proper compensation also. They were guaranteed employment in return of their land but the companies were permitted to terminate the concerned person without citing proper reasons. However, there is a provision of financial assistance in exchange of the employment (Das, 2016). The marginalized people continued to suffer from the hardships in Odisha despite launch of several developmental projects.

 

6. CONCLUSION:

The recurrent resistance against the developmental projects across the state marked that proper negotiation of compensation is imperative in order to start any developmental projects successfully. The generation of alternative livelihood and negotiation according to the needs of the local people is essential as holistic development cannot be achieved without paying heed to the voices of the marginalized. The government must realize that undertaking developmental projects alone cannot be a solution to the problems of the local people and before embarking on a project, government should have discussions with the local populace instead of inflicting violence and repression on them. The civil society organizations and media can also play an important role in making the people aware about their rights and the positive and negative effects of developmental projects.

 

7. REFERENCES:

1.     Bhushan C, Hazra M. Z. and Banerjee S. Rich Land Poor People: Is ‘Sustainable’ Mining Possible? (State of India’s Environment; 6). Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi, India. 2008.

2.     Business Standard. MoU Signed Players Invest Rs. 2.15 Lakh Cr In Odisha. Retrieved from http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/mou-signed-players-invest-rs-2-15-lakh-cr-in-odisha-114120100832_1.html. December 1, 2014.

3.     Chakrabarty B. and Kujur R. K. Maoism in India: Reincarnation of Ultra-Left Wing Extremism in the Twenty-First Century. Routledge, Oxford, USA and Canada. 2010; pp. 118-119.

4.     Dash K. C. and Samal K. C. New Mega Projects in Orissa: Protests by Potential Displaced Persons. Social Change. 2008; 38(4): 627-644.

5.     Das V. Is There No Alternative? Land Laws and Tribal Rights in Odisha. In V. Bhagat-Ganguly (Ed.), Land Rights in India: Policies, Movements and Challenges. Routledge, London, USA and India. 2016.

6.     Datta  D. and Chatterjee  D. Assessment of Community-based Initiatives in Sustainable Management of Indian Dry Deciduous Forests. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology. 2012; 19(2): 155-171.

7.     Government of Odisha, Forest and Environment Department. Joint Forest Management Resolution, 2008. Retrieved from http://www.odisha.gov.in/forest_environment/Forest_resolution/pdf/17454_22.10.08.pdf. 2008.

8.     Jain A. and Sharma R. The Indian Forest Rights Act, 2006: Salient Features, Scope and 2012 Amendment Rules. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. 2015; 4(2): 095-108.

9.     Kumar K. and Choudhary P. R. A Socio-Economic and Legal Study of Scheduled Tribes’ Land in Orissa (Study supported by World Bank, Washington DC, U.S.A.). Retrieved from http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/46286057/A_socioeconomic_and_legal_study_of_sched20160606-14594-1h38bqi.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1491966054&Signature=GYpudeKOGCturTLHzg2n2rKs%2Fcw%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DA_SocioEconomic_and_Legal_Study_of_Sched.pdf. 2005.

10.   Marshall S. and Balaton-Chrimes S. Tribal Claims against the Vedanta Bauxite Mine in Niyamgiri, India: What Role did the UK OECD National Contact Point Play in Instigating Free, Prior and Informed Consent? Non-Judicial Redress Mechanisms Report Series 9. Retrieved from SSRN-id2878211.pdf. 2016.

11.   Mohapatra B. P. Decentralized Forest Governance, Institutions and Livelihoods in Odisha: A Study of Evolution of Policy Process and Politics. (RULNR Monograph - 19). RULNR, Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad, India. 2014

12.   Mishra B. Agriculture, Industry and Mining in Orissa in the Post-Liberalization Era: An Inter-District and Inter-State Panel Analysis. Economic and Political Weekly. 2010; XLV (20): 49-68.

13.   Mishra M. Communicating the True Ecological Cost of Development: Addressing Development and Environment in Orissa, India. In J. Servaes (Eds.), Sustainable Development and Green Communication: African and Asian Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, UK. 2013; pp. 147-169.

14.   Mukul. Tribal Areas: Transition to Self-Governance. Economic and Political Weekly. 1997; XXXII(18): 928-929.

15.   Odisha Forest Development Corporation. Non Timber Forest Products.  Retrieved from https://www.odishafdc.com/ntfp_grampanchayat.php. 2017.

16.   Pal M. Panchayats in Fifth Scheduled Areas. Economic and Political Weekly.  2000; XXXV(19): 1602-1606.

17.   Pandey B. The Kalinganagar Tragedy: Development Goal or Development Malaise. Social Change.  2008; 38(4), 609-626.

18.   Patra H. S, Mishra B. K, Sahu B, Dash P. and Mohapatra P. P. Impact of Mining in Scheduled Area of Orissa: A Case Study from Keonjhar. Vasundhara, Bhubaneswar: Odisha. Retrieved from http://vasundharaodisha.org/Research%20Reports/Impact%20of%20Mining%20in%20Schduled%20Area%20of%20Orissa.pdf. 2008.

19.   Pattanaik S. Mining, Land Acquisition and Tribal Rights: Does FRA Secure That?Retrieved from http://www.nird.org.in/ nird_docs/srsc/srsc230217-21.pdf. undated.

20.   Rout S. Joint Forest Management in Orissa: Challenges and Opportunities. (Working Paper No. 117). Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore, India. 2003.

21.   Sarap K. Participatory Forest Management in Orissa: A Review of Policies and Implementation. (Understanding Livelihood Impacts of Participatory Forest Management Implementation in India and Nepal, Working Paper No. 2). Overseas Development Group, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. 2004.

22.   Sarap K. Forests and Livelihoods in Orissa. In O. Springate-Baginski and P. Blaikie (Eds.), Forests, People and Power: The Political Ecology of Reform in South Asia. Earthscan, London, UK.  2007; pp. 266-270.

23.   Sarap K. and Sarangi T. K. Issues on Forest Governance in Contemporary Odisha. In N Ghosh, P Mukhopadhyay, A Shah and M Panda (Eds.), Nature, Economy and Society: Understanding the Linkages (). Springer, New Delhi, India.  2016; pp. 228-236.

24.   ST and SC Development, Minorities & Backward Classes Welfare Department, Government of Odisha. Percentage of S.T. Population. Retrieved from  http://stscodisha.gov.in/Aboutus.asp?GL=abt&PL=1. 2017

25.   The Indian Forest (Orissa Amendment) Act. Retrieved from http://lawodisha.gov.in/files/acts/act_972549887_1439547702.pdf. 1954.

26.   The Orissa Communal Forest and Private Lands (Prohibition of Alienation) Act. Retrieved from http://www.odisha.gov.in/forest_environment/Forest_Act/pdf/Acts/3TOCFPLA_1948.pdf. 1948.

27.   The Orissa Preservation of Private Forests Act. Retrieved from http://lawodisha.gov.in/files/acts/act_1809486811_1442302987.pdf. 1947.

 

Received on 02.01.2019       Modified on 12.01.2019

Accepted on 16.01.2019      ©AandV Publications All right reserved