AN ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, NATIONAL LEGISLATION, JUDGEMENTS, AND INSTITUTIONS AS THEY INTERRELATE WITH TERRITORIES AND AREAS CONSERVED BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES

The report examines the tension between India's centralized conservation laws, such as the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972, and the rights of forest-dependent communities. It highlights the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 (FRA) as a critical tool for securing community tenure and management rights. The document details various types of CCAs, including sacred groves and community-managed forests, while criticizing the 'ecodevelopment' model and the lack of legal recognition for marine and wetland conservation initiatives. It concludes with recommendations for legal reforms to prioritize site-specific, decentralized governance and the recognition of customary laws.

• India possesses significant biological diversity, containing over 8.1 per cent of the world's biodiversity on 2.4 per cent of the earth's surface, with a large population of indigenous-tribal people constituting 8.08 per cent of the country's population.
• Community Conserved Areas (CCAs) in India are diverse, including an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 sacred groves, as well as community-protected heronries, wetlands, and wildlife reserves.
• The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 (FRA) is a landmark law that recognizes the rights of forest dwellers to protect, conserve, regenerate, or manage community forest resources.
• The Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972 (WLPA) generally excludes local communities from the management and decision-making of National Parks and Sanctuaries, often leading to the displacement of people.
• Marine and coastal ecosystems lack a formal legal framework that recognizes the tenure or customary rights of fishing communities, despite the existence of traditional management systems like the Padu system in Tamil Nadu.
• The Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules 2010 are criticized for their heavy reliance on centralized bureaucracies and the total absence of citizen involvement in the identification and management of wetlands.
• The 'ecodevelopment' model is viewed as flawed because it treats local communities and conservation as incompatible, focusing on diverting 'pressures' rather than granting tenure security or decision-making power.
• Judicial decisions have had mixed impacts; while some acknowledge the role of community conservation, others have restricted access to non-timber forest products (NTFP) and stalled the implementation of the FRA.
• The Biological Diversity Act 2002 establishes Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) at the local level, but their role is often limited to documentation and advisory functions rather than actual resource management.
• In Gadchiroli district, Maharashtra, the village of Mendha-Lekha became a pioneer by successfully claiming Community Forest Resource (CFR) rights and challenging the state's control over bamboo harvesting.

APA

Broome, N. P., Bhutani, S., Rajagopalan, R., Desor, S., & Vijairaghavan, M. (2012). AN ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, NATIONAL LEGISLATION, JUDGEMENTS, AND INSTITUTIONS AS THEY INTERRELATE WITH TERRITORIES AND AREAS CONSERVED BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES. Natural Justice. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Asia-Regional-India.pdf

Chicago

Broome, Neema Pathak, Shalini Bhutani, Ramya Rajagopalan, Shiba Desor, and Mridula Vijairaghavan. AN ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, NATIONAL LEGISLATION, JUDGEMENTS, AND INSTITUTIONS AS THEY INTERRELATE WITH TERRITORIES AND AREAS CONSERVED BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES. Natural Justice, 2012. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Asia-Regional-India.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Broome |first1=Neema Pathak |last2=Bhutani |first2=Shalini |last3=Rajagopalan |first3=Ramya |last4=Desor |first4=Shiba |last5=Vijairaghavan |first5=Mridula |title=AN ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, NATIONAL LEGISLATION, JUDGEMENTS, AND INSTITUTIONS AS THEY INTERRELATE WITH TERRITORIES AND AREAS CONSERVED BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES |publisher=Natural Justice |date=September 2012 |url=https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Asia-Regional-India.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{broome2012analysis, author = {Broome, Neema Pathak and Bhutani, Shalini and Rajagopalan, Ramya and Desor, Shiba and Vijairaghavan, Mridula}, title = {{AN ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, NATIONAL LEGISLATION, JUDGEMENTS, AND INSTITUTIONS AS THEY INTERRELATE WITH TERRITORIES AND AREAS CONSERVED BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES}}, institution = {Natural Justice}, year = {2012}, month = sep, url = {https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Asia-Regional-India.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }