Introduction

In 2006, in Chhattisgarh state, the state-owned Forest Development Corporation (FDC) started felling nearly 40,000 hectares of dense natural forests involving around 20 million trees. The intention was to replace these natural forests with commercially-cultivated teak.

Chhattisgarh is a new state, which split from Madhya Pradesh state in 2000. Koriya district is situated in the north-west corner of Chhattisgarh. It is one of the most densely forested areas of Chhattisgarh, with a forest cover of 62 per cent (FSI 2011Forest Survey of India (FSI) (2011) ‘Chapter 9: Forest and Tree Resources in States and Union Territories, in India State of Forest Report, 2011’,http://fsi.nic.in/cover_2011/chattisgarh.pdf(last checked 29 August 2017) [Google Scholar], 115). In the 2011 Census, Koriya district’s population was estimated to be 658,917 (Directorate of Economic & Statistics CG 2013Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Chhattisgarh (2013) ‘Statistical abstract of Chhattisgarh-2011-12’,http://descg.gov.in/pdf/publications/allpub/4.Statisticalabstract2011_12.pdf(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar], 14). Sixty-nine per cent of the population in the district live in rural areas (ibid., 14). The district is divided into five administrative units or blocks: Manendragarh, Bharatpur, Sonhat, Khadgawan, and Baikunthpur. Nearly half (46 per cent) (ibid., 15) of the population are ‘Scheduled Tribes’ (that is, people belonging to various indigenous communities, including Gonds, Cherwas, Pandos, Agarias, Oraons, and Baigas¹1 For further information on the tribal communities of the district please see http://korea.gov.in/culture.htm(last checked 10 October 2017).View all notes). With this high proportion of indigenous population, Koriya falls under the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of India that contains special provisions meant to protect and benefit indigenous communities living in an area.²2 A Scheduled Area, under the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of India (1949), has been identified based on the preponderance of tribal population, compactness and reasonable size of the area, viable administrative entity, and economic backwardness of the area as compared to the neighbouring areas. The Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA) in the Fifth Schedule Areas provides certain distinct provisions meant to protect and benefit indigenous communities living in the area and empowers the Gram Sabha or village assembly to(i) safeguard and preserve the (a) traditions and customs of the people, and their cultural identity, (b) community resources, and (c) customary mode of dispute resolution; (ii) carry out executive functions to (a) approve plans, programmes and projects for social and economic development; (b) identify persons as beneficiaries under the poverty alleviation and other programmes; (c) issue a certificate of utilisation of funds by the Panchayat for the plans; programmes and projects. (See http://pesadarpan.gov.in/en, last checked 1 August 2017)View all notes

The indigenous communities in Koriya are dependent on the forests for a large part of their livelihoods, as agriculture in most parts of the district is rain-fed and single-cropped. These sal and mixed forests, covering about two-thirds of the geographical area, are central to the lives and survival of indigenous people. Forest produce, such as wild mushrooms, leafy vegetables, fruits, nuts, edible oilseeds, and tubers, are important sources of food security and nutrition for the people who live near and within the forest. Indigenous women use the produce to feed their families. Hence as in other tribal regions, forests provide greater resilience to indigenous communities while their destruction leads to impoverishment and migration for these communities (HLC 2014High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India (HLC) (2014) Report of the High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India,https://ruralindiaonline.org/resources/report-of-the-high-level-committee-on-socio-economic-health-and-educational-status-of-the-tribals-of-india/(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar]). Forests are also central to the spiritual and cultural traditions of the indigenous peoples who live in the forest. In India, indigenous peoples are able to draw on the laws on self-governance in indigenous areas to assert their rights over forests and natural resources. Yet these notions of indigenous peoples’ rights come into conflict with the commercial exploitation of water and forests.

Forest Development Corporations (FDCs) are profit-making bodies that have been set up in most states in India with the aim to undertake forest-based commercial activities, with different functioning in each state (ICFRE 2010Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE) (2010) ‘Forest Sector Report India’, 2010,http://www.icfre.org/FSRI-REPORT_English.pdf(last checked 29 August 2017) [Google Scholar]). The FDC of Chhattisgarh was formed with the aim to ‘enhance productivity of the forests’ (http://rvvn.cgstate.gov.in/node/1, last checked 1 September 2017), one of the strategies being to improve production through replacing relatively slow-growing natural trees (like sal) with faster-growing species (like teak), deemed to have ‘higher economic value’ (http://rvvn.cgstate.gov.in/node/1). FDCs make profits and pay dividends to the state governments. At the point of clearing natural forest for commercial timber cultivation, FDCs can make a very significant amount of revenue by cutting and selling some of the best natural forests in the country. Over the years, huge tracts of forests have been handed over by various states to their FDCs (Deshpande 2004Deshpande Vivek (2004) ‘Free fall’, Indian Express, 1 August,http://www.indianexpress.com/oldStory/52142/(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar]). An estimated 60 per cent of India’s total timber is produced and harvested by the FDCs (ICFRE 2010Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE) (2010) ‘Forest Sector Report India’, 2010,http://www.icfre.org/FSRI-REPORT_English.pdf(last checked 29 August 2017) [Google Scholar], 130).

During 2005, the FDC of Chhattisgarh had prepared and gained approval for Forest Improvement Working Plans relating to the three districts of Koriya, Sarguja, and Kawardha. The felling operations started in December 2005. The women of Adivasi Adhikar Samiti (AAS) (the Organisation for Rights of Indigenous People) took action in Koriya to protect the natural forest on which they and their families and communities depend. This article focuses on these struggles.

We were involved in the work ourselves as social activists, and draw on personal experience as facilitators of a movement for indigenous people’s rights in Koriya, set up in Manendragarh block, from December 2002 onwards. We were managing a civil society programme called the ‘Koriya Initiative’, working on issues of rights of indigenous people, especially on issues of health and food security. As we describe in the next section, this movement combined with community health workers (Mitanins) connected to a state-wide programme, to form the AAS in 2004. Quotations and details of discussions related here come from our notes taken during the time of the protests. We also draw on official documents related to the deforestation-projects, the legal case that was filed in the High Court, laws related to environment and forests, and subsequent media reports.

Struggle against felling of natural forests in Koriya district

The struggle against forest felling

On 10 January 2006, during a regular monthly meeting of the AAS leaders facilitated by the authors in Manendragarh town, the Mitanin from Badkabehera village arrived with a group of other women from her village. They wanted to discuss large-scale felling taking place in forests around their village, which they had put a stop to before coming for the meeting. The Mitanin from Badkabehera narrated the story. About a week back, felling of trees had begun and men were employed from her village to work as labourers and a watchman. These men had not been given any information about the nature or scale of the operations.

She stated:

On hearing this, everyone present realised that more information was urgently needed on the felling operations. AAS leaders went to the State Forest Department office, to submit an application asking for a copy of the Working Plan for the felling, citing the Right to Information Act 2005. The FDCs prepare Forest Improvement Working Plans, for approval from the State Forest Department, and the Central Government of India’s Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF). They were directed to the new FDC office, where they obtained a copy of the Plan and a permission letter issued by MoEF. In Koriya district, the FDCC planned to fell trees in 11,093 hectares (Ha) of natural forests, mostly (9,332Ha) dense natural sal and mixed forests, and then replace them with commercial plantations of teak (CRVVN 2004Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam (CRVVN) (2004) Working Plan in Koriya District 2004-05 to 2014-15 [Google Scholar], xix).The details of the Working Plan were reviewed and discussed with AAS leaders, and the organisation unanimously decided that this Plan had to be challenged. An elderly Mitanin from Badkabehera village recalled:

Below, we list some of the strategies used by activists.

Subsequent struggles

The movement and win against the FDCC forest felling strengthened the AAS and built its knowledge and capacities in working on forest rights. Therefore, in January 2007, when the Chhattisgarh State Forest Department started implementing its ten year Working Plan in Koriya, which involved a totally separate plan of felling of trees in three blocks (Manendragarh, Bharatpur, and Sonhat), the AAS members were quick to take cognisance. This plan focused on felling trees as part of the ‘scientific management’ of forests for the purpose of ‘forest improvement’ regularly undertaken by the Forest Department (Forest Department Chhattisgarh 2005Forest Department, Government of Chhattisgarh (2005) Working Plan in Koriya Forest Division 2005-06 to 2014-15 [Google Scholar], 139).

Though the scale of felling was smaller than the FDCC felling, the AAS feared that without vigilant monitoring, this felling could cause a lot of destruction to the forests.

The women in Manendragarh and Bharatpur once again undertook extensive surveys of the felled area, and found that many of the rules pertaining to girth, fruit trees, and endangered species were being flouted. Moreover, the community objected to the fact that according to the Working Plan, ‘old, dying and diseased trees’ (ibid., 111) were to be felled, as these dry ones were the only trees that the local community had the rights over, to use for their daily needs like firewood.

The movement spread to the neighbouring block of Sonhat, which had not been part of the previous struggle. Similar strategies were used as in the previous struggle. Leaders from Manendragarh went to the area to train the Mitanins and other women on the procedures for checking and recording the felled area. Women in Sonhat adopted a similar method of first trying to persuade the labourers to stop the felling, and then taking away the tools from them in case they did not stop. The Forest Department filed a number of police reports against the leaders. This time too, the village assemblies passed resolutions against the felling. However, the Forest Protection Committees (FPCs) did not agree to stop the felling as they were to receive part of the money from the sale of the felled logs. The organisation organised public events in all the blocks and presented the report based on their survey of the felled area and their demands to the District Forest Officer (DFO). The leaders persuaded the DFO to visit some of the villages with them and survey the trees which had been marked for felling. When the DFO visited some of the villages, he, along with the leaders, identified more than 250 trees that were wrongly marked for felling. The DFO realised the mistakes and ordered all felling be stopped until the forest staff had been trained properly.

Another set of struggles took place later in 2007. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 or the Forest Rights Act, had been passed by the Parliament of India. It was a landmark act that entitled indigenous people in the forest areas to obtain land deeds giving legal recognition of entitlement to the land they had been tilling for generations. The condition for claiming rights was that the land had to be in the possession of the family prior to 13 December 2005.¹⁰10 In line with ‘The Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006’.View all notes This prompted the Forest Department in Koriya to undertake plantations on indigenous people’s lands forcibly during the rainy season (June–September) in 2007, in order to ‘take back’ the land before the indigenous people could apply for land deeds.

All throughout the district there were cases of the Forest Department destroying people’s standing crops of maize and other millets, and digging pits for sapling transplantation on the land. In some of the villages in Manendragrah, the Mitanins, along with other women leaders, resisted this in their own fields. The women would keep filling the pits back at night. The department retaliated with brute force this time. In Paradol village, the forest staff came to meet the women along with a plain clothes man with a rifle and told them to stop filling the pits. They slapped and verbally abused the women and threatened them with the gun. Once they left, the women and the Mitanin went to the police station where the police refused to write their report. Meanwhile the Forest Department staff had already filed police reports against the women (personal experiences and communications).

Similar incidents of intimidation by the Forest Department and inaction by the police took place in other villages. However, despite this, resistance to the forced possession of land continued and hundreds of indigenous families saved the lands that they had been living on or cultivating for generations.

Since then, the AAS has been able to thwart other threats to natural resources. In 2008, AAS successfully thwarted a second threat to natural resources in their areas, in the form of a proposed power plant. In 2013, a third threat to these forests emerged in the form of a Coal-Bed-Methane¹¹11 Coal-Bed-Methane is a form of natural gas extracted from coal beds.View all notes extraction project. The women feared that the extraction of methane would deplete their ground water resources, pollute drinking water, and adversely affect the natural forests and the ecosystem. Using similar strategies as before, they effectively stalled the project for three years. However, the MoEF granted the go-ahead to a private corporation in 2016 and the struggle is still on. Though there has not yet been any implementation on the ground, a letter (dated 15 April 2017) was received by the co-author just as this article was being drafted, which stated that they will soon be starting the operations.

Discussion: emerging issues from these struggles

The first issue that emerges from a consideration of these struggles is the impact on the environment and biodiversity that forest felling represents. Natural forests are the richest source of biodiversity. Their commercial value may be low but they have very high biological value. Therefore felling of natural forests on a large scale and replacing them with commercial plantations would have caused severe damage to the environment and biodiversity. A commercial plantation can never fill the ecological gap created by removing a natural forest ecosystem. In this case, teak was an alien species for this ecological zone: The Imperial Gazetteer of India (1908The Imperial Gazetteer of India (1908-1931 [v. 1, 1909]) New Edition, Published Under the Authority of His Majesty’s Secretary of State for India in Council, Oxford: Clarendon Press,http://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/gazetteer/(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar]–1931The Imperial Gazetteer of India (1908-1931 [v. 1, 1909]) New Edition, Published Under the Authority of His Majesty’s Secretary of State for India in Council, Oxford: Clarendon Press,http://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/gazetteer/(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar]), first published in 1909, shows that there was no teak in Koriya at that time, while it lists sal and bamboo as being in abundance. In terms of fauna, the Working Plan itself listed over 23 species of wild animals (like panther, bear, hyena, fox, jackal, and deer), and 30 species of wild birds found in the forests in question (CRVVN 2004Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam (CRVVN) (2004) Working Plan in Koriya District 2004-05 to 2014-15 [Google Scholar], 119–24).

Second is the issue of livelihoods and food security of forest-dependent people. Most forest dwellers, especially indigenous communities, depend on forests for their livelihood (HLC 2014High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India (HLC) (2014) Report of the High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India,https://ruralindiaonline.org/resources/report-of-the-high-level-committee-on-socio-economic-health-and-educational-status-of-the-tribals-of-india/(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar]). In Koriya too, a large part of the annual cash income of families came from collection of minor forest produce. The impact that deforestation could’ve had on tribal livelihoods can be gauged from past experiences which show that areas that have experienced deforestation have high migration rates (HLC 2014High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India (HLC) (2014) Report of the High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India,https://ruralindiaonline.org/resources/report-of-the-high-level-committee-on-socio-economic-health-and-educational-status-of-the-tribals-of-india/(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar]). People losing their forest in their own area then have to collect produce from farther forests, resulting in numerous conflicts (ibid.).

Related to the issue of livelihoods is that of basic food security and nutrition of indigenous people. Forests are not just a source of cash income to them, but a very significant share of their nutrition comes from what the forest gives to them.¹²12 This includes a variety of wild mushrooms (local names boda, khukdi, putu, chhatnietc.), leafy vegetables (over 20 wild species), fruits (like guava, mango, jamun, tendu, gular etc.), nuts (like chironji), edible oilseeds (like mahua seeds, sal seeds etc.), and several species of edible tubers. These are important sources of nutrients to them as they would otherwise be left with mainly rice or millets in their diet. These food items have evolved along with the natural forests and exist and grow naturally in them.View all notes Almost none of these could be found in a teak plantation. Destruction of their natural forests can severely increase nutritional deficiencies and under-nutrition in tribal people.

Third is the non-economic, broader impact on the culture and way of life of indigenous communities. When states consider the economic benefits of clearing forests for cultivation, they are missing the key point that the forest has worth which is not monetary. While the entire human race gains non-economic benefits from the natural environment, for indigenous people, forests form the core of their way of life. Forests are not just resources important for livelihoods, but a living part of their culture. Most of their cultural practices and spiritual beliefs are based on the forests. Rituals related to the birth of a child, marriage or death, and most festivals cannot be completed without trees and animals. However, the ‘mainstream’ society does not recognise this.

A limited awareness of the importance of non-economic aspects was present in the Working Plan for the FDCC felling project, which said that that trees having religious importance would not be cut. As noted earlier, women checked what had actually been happening after felling operations had occurred, and this aspect was something they noted. However, the FDCC held only those trees as sacred which belonged to dominant organised religions (for example, the Banyan and Pipal trees are sacred to Hindus). Trees like sal or sendha hold importance in tribal animistic spirituality (Xaxa 1998Xaxa, Virginius (1998) ‘Cultural dimension of ecology: a case study of the Oraons’, in Baidyanath Saraswati (ed.) The Cultural Dimensions of Ecology, New Delhi: IGNCA,http://ignca.nic.in/eBooks/Culture_n_Development_04.pdf(last checked 1 September 2017) [Google Scholar]), but these were not listed as trees of religious significance in the Working Plan (CRVVN 2004Chhattisgarh Rajya Van Vikas Nigam (CRVVN) (2004) Working Plan in Koriya District 2004-05 to 2014-15 [Google Scholar]).

Moreover, destruction of natural forests would cause irreversible damage to the indigenous health systems of tribal people. The forests in question provided over 50 types of plants having recognised medicinal value. These plants are central to the medical tradition and practices of the indigenous communities.

Another issue which emerges from this experience is the implied clash between natural resource use by the state for economic development, and the rights to self-governance of indigenous people. As noted, the areas where felling took place fall under the Fifth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. The Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1995 provides for the village assemblies of people in these areas to exercise control over their natural resources. Subsequent Supreme Court judgements have also upheld that people’s wishes should be respected regarding bringing in large industrial projects in tribal areas. The MoEF’s National Working Plan Code 2004 made it mandatory for state governments to enter into formal MoUs with local communities to identify the areas where any felling operations are to be done. But as the experience with the FDCC showed, these stipulations were mostly ignored by the state government.

This has serious implications for the idea of local self-governance that the law intended to provide to the indigenous people. The Forest Department and FDCs continue to treat forests as their sole property, and the concerns of the indigenous people were left unheard even when complete removal of forests around them was planned. In Chhattisgarh, the state government gave away the prime forest area of dense natural forests to the FDCC, the prime concern being that of revenue earning.

The question with respect to the Forest Development Corporations is not just regarding their role in felling but their entire reason for existing. FDCs were created nearly four decades ago to enable state governments to bring in institutional finance for ‘forest development’. But for FDCs and governments, ‘forest development’ has always meant commercial exploitation of forests for timber. In our view, and the views of the women whose actions we have discussed in this article, the FDCs serve no conservation purpose now. Therefore the time has come when they should be disbanded altogether.

Final thoughts: promoting civil society action for natural resource justice

This struggle, and the success it achieved in putting a stop to deforestation, provides some good lessons for promoting civil society action for natural resource justice. Building organisations led by women is a key step. It is also important that such organisations are built around a broad-based justice-based agenda, which has the flexibility to evolve and to accommodate challenges as they emerge. The grassroots organisations need to have the autonomy to make such changes in the agenda and the freedom to take-up issues as per their dynamic priorities and confidence. Straight-jacketed projects therefore are not the ideal form for promoting such action as they tend to freeze the agenda and even strategies for grassroots action. There is a need to develop ways of promoting projects which have such flexibility built-in.

Another important lesson relates to how a combination of strategies – ground level consensus building, petitioning, street protest, direct action (snatching axes and stopping trucks), and legal options (PILs), seeking support from journalists, media, sympathetic politicians, lawyers, and larger networks was also useful. While middle-class activists did play a role in seeking the linkages and legal intervention, the struggle was a product of the local initiative of the AAS. This is reflected in the fact that AAS members initiated their direct action spontaneously to stop the felling. The confidence that AAS exhibited in taking up such a struggle drew from its previous successes in securing food and health entitlements.

Finally, it is interesting how Mitanins played a central role in this struggle. They opposed state action, while being part of a government-run health programme (Sanders 2008Sanders, David (2008) ‘Revitalisation of primary health care and health system development: the potential of community health workers’, Presentation at International Symposium to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Alma Ata Declaration at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,http://www.flinders.edu.au/medicine/fms/sites/southgate_old/documents/Event/2009/19Mar09%20DavidSanders_Adelaide2009LSHTM_CHWs.pdf(last checked 30 August 2017) [Google Scholar]). This was made possible by various factors, in our view. The design of the Mitanin Programme gives Mitanins a fair level of autonomy to interpret their role in delivering, fostering, and supporting health. They were able to work in a holistic and wide way that focused on the social issues that determine health. They also played dual roles as service providers as well as activists. Another very important factor was the movement-building that went on with Mitanins working together with other activists, and organising as AAS, for the activism around forest felling. Subsequent writings and presentations have highlighted this (Sanders 2008Sanders, David (2008) ‘Revitalisation of primary health care and health system development: the potential of community health workers’, Presentation at International Symposium to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Alma Ata Declaration at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,http://www.flinders.edu.au/medicine/fms/sites/southgate_old/documents/Event/2009/19Mar09%20DavidSanders_Adelaide2009LSHTM_CHWs.pdf(last checked 30 August 2017) [Google Scholar]; Sundararaman 2007Sundararaman, Thiagarajan(2007) ‘Community health-workers: scaling up programmes’, The Lancet 369: 2058–9 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60326-2[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]). This case shows that the two roles were in fact mutually supportive and not contradictory. CHW programmes need to be designed keeping this in mind.