1. Decentralised Forest Governance,
Institutions and Livelihoods in Odisha-A
Study of Evolution of Policy Process and
Politics
Bishnu Prasad Mohapatra, Visiting Fellow
Research Unit For Livelihoods and Natural Resources(RULNR)
Centre for Economic and Social Studies,
Hyderabad - 500 016

2. Outline of the Proposal
 Introduction
 Policy Process, Politics and Livelihoods-The Issues
 Statement of Problem
 Review of the Literature
 Theoretical Framework
 Key Research Questions
 Objectives
 Data-base and Methodology
 Policy Process Framework and Key Indicators
 Expected Outcome

3. INTRODUCTION
 In Forest Sector, Governance Issues have attained prominence
because of changing Policies, Political Scenario and emergence of
new institutions as an outcome of policy process and over
emphasising politics in such policy process.
 In the case of Odisha, forest policy process(formulation and
implementation) is believed to be coincided with the emergence of
neo socio-political orders, emerging economic and ecological
concerns, institutional arrangements and behavior of actors thereby
argued as a part of political process.
 The Forest Governance and Policies in the State starting from
colonial era to current period have witnessed transition in institutional
arrangements, sustainable forest management and involvement of
community in management regime. Decentralisation has become a
major policy in the State Forestry Sector.

4. Continued…..
 It is argued that there are four different trajectories of State
intervention with regard to managing forest or forest governance in
Odisha
 The Wildlife Act and the consequent expansion of Protected Area Network.
 The Forest Conservation Act(FCA)-which restricting forest land to non-forest
use .
 The Joint Forest Management(JFM)-which is about making forest department
more participatory.
 The FRA-which has recognized individual and community rights over forest and
forest land.
 Forest Resources have a far larger role in sustaining livelihoods and
in the case of Odisha, it is believed that the contribution of forest
resources to tribal livelihoods are immense.
 However policy process in State Forest Governance largely ignored
the interest of forest dependent communities, except in the case of
FRA, despite the fact that the policy process has gradually moved to
redress the livelihood issues of dependent communities.

5. FOREST POLICY PROCESS, POLITICS AND LIVELIHOODS-
THE ISSUES
 Forest Policy Process in Odisha since Colonial Period
considered as a rational process with a firm conviction that
Forest Resources are State Property.
 However, keeping the rapid depletion of forest resources and
increasing population pressure, the State forest policy has
taken a major shift and gradually switched over towards
community conservation and participation mode.
 In such process(policy shift) the issue of livelihood of forest
dwellers are believed to be shaped gradually and such changes
happened in the case of FRA apart from NTFP and Kenduleaf
management policies.
 So the current study is designed to understand the nature of
such changes with a broad research question that why such
Change?

6. STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
 Forest policy analysis in the case of Odisha has provided limited
space to understand the nature of policy process and their
implications.
 Forest Policy process since last few years have been changed
considerably in which both the State and Non-State actors have
played major role.
 Livelihood issues gradually emerged as a part of forest policy
process with the involvement of Non-State Actors which has
turned policy process as a political rather than rational process.
 Emergence of PFM in 1988 and FRA in 2006 are believed to be
part of pro-poor policy reforms.
 Continuity and Change in the State Forest Policy in different
period of time has not been reflected in earlier studies .Important
policy specific and period specific developments are to be taken
into consideration in the proposed study.

7. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Available Literature Key Arguments Authors
Theories of Policy Different Models like Elite Ostorm, Anderson(2006)
Process Theory, Group Theory, Jahariadis, Jones et
Institutionalism, Rational al(1984), Sabatier(1999),
Choice Theory, Political Jenkins-Smith, Berry and
System Theory and Policy Berry(1999), Adam and
Process Model helps to Kris.
understand policy making
process. Two Broad aspects of
policy analysis i.e. improve
policy and policy Making and
how policy has been made
highlighted.
Rational Vs Political It is argued that Policy process Clay and
Nature of Policy is a rational process and the Schaffer(1984)Juma and
Process policy formulation and Clarke(1995),
implementation are separated Sutton(1999), Mooij(2003)
from each other. However, and Bose(2004)
researchers have justified that
policy process is a political
process as the process

8. Available Literature Key Arguments Authors
Policy Reforms and Continued……
Pro -poor Policy Reforms in Saxena(1993), De
Their Implications on Forest Governance is argued an Haan(2006),
Forest Governance outcome of widespread failure of Hobely(2007)
and Livelihood Governments to arrest
System deforestation, control illegal
activities or generate the desired
of benefit. Policy reforms in Forest
Governance with appropriate
livelihood opportunity is argued to
be addressed income need of
forest dwellers.
Forest Governance In the case of India and Odisha, it Dey(1976),
and Nature of Forest argued that the Forest Policy Guha(1983),
Policies process have been gradually Hiedenheimer(1990),
shifted with increasing and Bose(2010)
involvement of Non-State Actors
which created scope to
understand the nature of policy
process in a change political
scenario. Why the particular policy
emerged, how emerged and why ,
how and to what effect
Governments pursue particular

9. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Key Conceptual Areas Major Focal Points
Policy Process and Different Policy process as a tool to understand the nature
Aspects of Policy Process of Policy formulation and Implementation
Analysis emerged to understand the different stages of
policy formulation and implementation in the
context of prevailing socio-political orders in a
State. The Policy process study is based on
empirical questions of Why, How and by Whom.
The Policy Cycle-An Approach Policy as a two way process linked with cause
to Understand Policy Process and effect. Policy Cycle helps to understand how
policy has been made and how distinctions can
be made between different stages in policy
making process.
Policy Process and Politics Both the Linear and Political policy process
model are important to understand nature of
power game, lobby , negotiation, Conflict and
Cooperation. Involvement of State and Non-State
Actors and the process of interaction and
bargaining are important part of politics. Political

10. THE POLICY CYCLE
Agenda-Setting
Policy Change Policy Formulation
Policy Evaluation Policy Legitimation
Implementation

11. FOREST POLICIES AND POLITICS- THE CASE OF ODISHA
Major State Forest Period Policy Implications
Policies
The Indian Forest Act 1927 •Forest Policy in the State was based on
Indian Forest Act of 1927 .
•The Primary focus was Commercial Use
of Forest Resources. No Focus on
Community Rights and Livelihoods.
The Wild Life Protection 1974 •Sanctuaries and National Parks Created
Rule which further restricted community rights.
•No effort was taken on promoting
Community Participation in Forest
Management.
•Community led Forest Management
System evolved.
The Orissa Forest Act 1972 •Focus was given to Reorganize Forest
Bureaucracy in the State for
Strengthening State Legitimacy.
•Usufruct Rights Restricted especially in
the case of Shifting Cultivation and
Collection of MFP.

12. Major State Forest
Policies
Period
Continued…..
Policy Implications
The Forest 1980 • Restriction imposed on diversion of forest
Conservation Act land.
•Amendment of Orissa Forest Act of 1972.
•No emphasis on rights of Forest Dwellers.
•Politics of Conservation and Control further
glorified.
The Orissa Village 1985 •Emphasis was given to involve Villages in
Forest Rule protection of degraded Forests.
•Community involvement in Management of
Forests got legal sanction.
•Livelihood Rights gradually evolved.
Joint Forest 1990 •The State Government’s Resolution accepted
Management Resolution JFM as a Strategy of Forest Management.
•Accepted Community Access to Forest
Resources for Sustenance of Livelihoods.
The Orissa Minor Forest 2002 •Rights of MFP (Administration) vested to
Produce Administration PRIs.
Rule •MSP and Trading Rights provided to local
people.
•Politics of NTFP became decentralized.

13. KEY RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 Why and how policies in forest governance in post
independence period emerged and why there was a focus on
decentralisation?
 Is there any link between policy process and institutions that
have been developed?
 What are the changing nature of policy process and why there is
a focus on Livelihood?
 How the policy process was linked with political process and
what is the role of different State and Non-State Actors in the
policy process?

14. OBJECTIVES
 To understand the nature of policy process i.e. process of policy
development and process of policy implementation in Odsiha forest
governance.
 To understand the role of formal and informal institutions in policy
process in Forest Sector and how such institutions influenced
framing and implementing forest policies in the State.
 To explore the link between forests policy process and political
factors that influences such process with regard to nature of
political parties, leadership and ideological base.
 To understand the significance of livelihood approach to the policy
process in Odisha forest governance and what political factors
motivated in this regard.
 To understand the case of Forest Rights Act, 2006 as an outcome of
pro-people policy measures and suggest strengthening policy
process in Forest sector in Odisha.

15. DATA-BASE AND METHODOLOGY
 Database and Methodology
 Exploration of Both the Secondary and Primary Data
 Secondary Data from Government Records like Acts, Rules,
Government Orders and Legislative Proceedings
 Reports available at District/Division Level Forest Offices
 Primary Data through Key Informants’ Interview with
Government Officials, Forest Bureaucrats, Legislators and
Leaders/Members of Civil Society, JMF and CFM.
 Content Analysis of Policy Related Developments, Legislative
Proceedings.
 Desk Review of Policy Documents, Archive Materials etc.
 Review of Articles Published in Different Journals, Books and
Monographs.

16. POLICY PROCESS FRAMEWORK AND KEY
INDICATORS
• When and
• Why •Process • Key How
Policy Implem
Agenda
•Streams Formula •Involveme Legitima Arguments Implemented
Setting nt of tion •Political entation • Role of
of Agenda tion Different
Actors Factors Actors

17. EXPECTED OUTCOME
 Understanding Forest Policy Process: The study will
help to understand policy process in Odisha’s Forestry
Sector. It will help to identifying policy gaps.
 Academic Outcome: The findings of the study will be
published as Working Paper and Monograph. Findings
will also publish in academic Journals and share
through conference and seminars.

18. References
 Agrawal, A. and Ostrom, E.2001: Collective Action, Property Rights and Decentralisation in
Resource use in India and Nepal, politics and society, 29(4), 485-514.
 Anderson, K.2006: Understanding Decentralised Forest Governance: an application of
institutional analysis and development framework, http://ejournal.nbii.org,vol(2).
 Bose, Indranil, 2010: How did the Indian Forest Rights Act, 2006 emerge? IPPG Discussion
paper 39, May 2010.
 Dash, Tushar, 2010: The Forest Rights Act: Redefining biodiversity conservation in India; Policy
matters, pp33-40.
 De Haan A, 2004: Disparities within India’s poorest regions: Why do the same Institutions work
differently in different places? World Development Report 2006.
 Easton, David, 1957: An approach to the analysis of political systems, world politics, April,1957.
 Guha, Ramchandra, 1983: Forestry in British and Post-British India, A Historical Analysis,
Economic & Political Weekly, November, pp1940-1947.
 Hobley, Marry, 2007: Where in the world is there pro-poor forest policy and tenure reform? Rights
and Resources Initiative.
 Jans, M. Theo, 2007: A Framework for Public Policy Analysis and Policy Evaluation, IES
research colooqium, Vrije Universiteit, Brussel.
 Jones, Charls, 1984: An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth,
1984.
 Leftwich.A, 2007: The political approach to Institutional Formation, Maintenance and Change,
IPPG Research program, UK.
 McGee.R, 2004: Unpacking Policy: Actors, knowledge and spaces in Brock,K, McGee, R. and
Gaventa,J(eds),Unpacking: Knowledge, Actors and Spaces in poverty reduction in Uganda and

19. Reference
 Patnaik,SK,2009: Forest and Tribal Livelihood in AB Ota
and KK Patnaik(eds), Two Tribal Friendly Acts and their
Implications, SCSTRTI, Bhubaneswar.
 Sutton, Rubeka, 1999: The Policy Process: An overview,
Overseas Development Institute, London (working paper
118).
 Sabatier,Paul A.1999: Theories of the policy process,
University of California, Davis.
 Sarap, Kailash,2007: Forests and Livelihoods in Orissa in
Oliver Springate-Baginski and Piers Blaikie(eds) Forests,
People and Power, the Political Ecology of Reforms in
South Asia with Earthscan, London.
 Webb.Edward.L. 2007: Forest Policy as a Changing
context in Asia in Edward L.Webb and Ganesh
P.Shivakoti (eds.) Decentralization, Forests and Rural
Communities: Policy Outcomes in South and Southeast
Asia in Sage Publication.

20. THANK YOU ALL!