This project ended in June 2007. This website was last updated 3 July 2008. We have kept the website available for our readers' convenience. If you interested to learn CIFOR's ongoing research, please click here.
Key Issues
The key issue often quoted and discussed in the context of livelihood strategies of rural poor of Meghalaya is the Jhum. Majority of the Jhumias (shifting cultivators) are below poverty line (IFAD, 2003). It has been widely decried by many as an inefficient form of agriculture, an impediment to progress of forestry and an agent of destruction of biodiversity (Majumdar, 1990). In contrast, others have argued that traditional shifting cultivation should not be seen as destructive as forest exploitation for timber by the industry. Some scientists have even argued that Jhum is an ingenious system of organic multiple cropping well suited to the heavy rainfall areas of the hill tracts (Ramakrishnan, 1992). Terrace cultivation as an alternative to Jhum has been widely tried, but it has not received a wide acceptance from the local tribal communities mainly because terracing requires heavy monetary input and its maintenance cost is high. It also needs heavy fertilizer applications (Mitra, 2003). So the local tribal communities switch to terrace cultivation only, as long as subsidies are available (Ramakrishnan, 1993). Singh (1996) argues that perceived superiority of Jhum cultivation over any other form of sedentary cultivation due to low ratio of usable land to population partly explains the persistence of this form of agriculture. Other reasons which explain preference for Jhum include economic security due to poor access to markets, capital, technical know-how of more commercially rewarding alternatives and cultural reasons. This highlights the need for better understanding of the livelihood strategies and opportunities of alternative income generation activities to improve livelihoods of shifting cultivators.
The practice of shifting cultivation and plantation of horticulture crops continues to be the main source of livelihoods of a large number of rural families, which is usually complemented by income derived from the sale of NTFPs. Significantly a large number of those who collect NTFPs are women, who in course of the day’s work gather various types of herbs, roots, fruits and fungi (Nongbri, 2001). However, the production and consumption practices of these groups are only oriented to ensure food security and basic minimum livelihood needs (CUTS, 2002). The high potential of some of the NTFPs like bamboo, broomstick grass, medicinal herbs etc. as a source of income-has been highlighted by many (Karki, 2001; Saxena, 2002), but there is lack of any feasibility evaluations of these enterprises. Hence, there is a general lack of any empirical basis for promoting NTFP-based enterprise.
The land tenure system in Meghalaya is complex. Although, most of the land belongs to communities, due to several factors like elite dominance, lack of land records, absence of legal or regulatory framework to protect interests of poor, (Dutta, 2002). The increasing privatization of land has further affected the livelihoods of poor people in several ways due to absence of access and control of productive assets. The proportion of cultivators (including tenants) to total workers has fallen in the state in last 30 years from 73% to 53%, where as the proportion of agricultural laborers has increased from 4.3% to 12.5% during the same period (GOI, 1999). Secondly, this has affected timber-related/NTFP income opportunities of many rural poor. As the commercial value of forests have increased over the years and access to the forest areas increased due to development of infrastructure, it has lead to enclosure of commons and privatization of forests. As Nathan (2001) puts it, despite the rhetoric of community ownership, a large part of forests in the state are privately owned.
This situation has been further complicated by the Supreme Court ban on felling in the region. The ban on timber has affected not only forest owners and contractors but millions of farmers, wood cutters, laborers cultivators from both forestry and non-forestry activities like repair shops for trucks, petty food shops etc (Nongbri, 2001). Saxena (2002) argues that with timber having no cash value, there is increasingly high threat of forests being converted to agricultural land. In addition to low value of timber, some studies have also highlighted that the excessive dependence of growing population in the rural areas on forest-biomass as source of energy as potential threat to deforestation in the region (Bhatt and Sachan, 2004). Overall, the current tenure arrangements, legislative framework as well lack of any viable alternative in the state, severely restrict the livelihood choices of rural poor.
The social-cultural fabric of tribal society in the state has also undergone major change in the past few decades. The state has also witnessed several inter-ethnic tensions and conflicts (Lyngdoh and Gassah, 2003).