Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197 www.elsevier.

com/locate/jenvman

Do developmental initiatives inuence local attitudes toward conservation? A case study from the KalakadMundanthurai Tiger Reserve, India
M. Arjunana, Christopher Holmesb, Jean-Philippe Puyravaudc, Priya Davidara,*
a

Salim Ali School of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Pondicherry University, Kalapet, Pondicherry 605 014, India b WCS International, B.P. 8500 Soavimbahoaka, 101 Antananarivo, Madagascar c ITPI India Pvt. Ltd., 6 Romain Rolland Street, Pondicherry 605 001, India Received 20 August 2004; revised 16 May 2005; accepted 20 June 2005 Available online 3 October 2005

Abstract We evaluated the conservation attitudes of the local villagers living adjacent to the KalakadMundanthurai Tiger Reserve in southern India 6 years after implementation of a World Bank funded eco-development project. We assessed attitudes towards three facets of conservation: the tiger, an emblematic species signifying Indias commitment to wildlife conservation; the forest, a principle source of fuelwood and other products; and the Forest Department, which manages the forest. More specically we predicted that (i) attitudes would be an effective predictor of resource use interest in the forest and (ii) benets obtained from the EDP would create more favorable attitudes towards conservation and the protected area employees. Twelve villages located within 3 km from the reserve boundary were chosen and 23% of the households interviewed with regard to their attitudes towards these three facets of conservation, their household resource use patterns, wealth, sex, age and length of residency. We found signicant associations between wealth, sex, age and both tiger and forest conservation. Providing benets has not changed the underlying attitudes of the communities. The poorer sections of society, whether receiving benets or not, tended to support tiger conservation because conserving wildlife did not affect their livelihood in any way, whereas both the rich and poor had misgivings about forest conservation due to dependency on forest products. We conclude that the eco-development project has not effectively addressed the most important of the local concerns. q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Conservation attitudes; India; KalakadMundanthurai Tiger Reserve; Protected areas; Rural livelihoods; Western Ghats; World Bank eco-development project

1. Introduction There is an inherent asymmetry in the costs and benets of wildlife conservation in developing countries. Whereas the benets of wildlife protection accrue to the national and global economy, the costs are often borne by the local communities. Therefore, integrating conservation and development projects has become popular as a way to

* Corresponding author. Tel.: C91 413 2213 806; fax: C91 413 2655 265. E-mail addresses: arjunan_m@yahoo.com (M. Arjunan), cholmes@ wcs.org (C. Holmes), jpp@itpi.co.in (J.-P. Puyravaud), davidarp@si.edu (P. Davidar).

0301-4797/$ - see front matter q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.06.007

alleviate the costs to the local communities in terms of loss of access to resources (Kiss, 1990; McNeely, 1995). The incentives provided by these programs are considered to fulll the dual objective of compensating the loss of livelihood and increasing sustainable practices (McNeely, 1995; Ineld and Adams, 1999; Holmes, 2003a). However, it has been pointed out that the Integrated Conservation-Development Projects (ICDPs) linking rural development with wildlife conservation might not lead to more sustainable practices (Barrett and Arcese, 1995; Oates, 1995). Reviews of such programs have identied potential conceptual aws (Barrett and Arcese, 1995; 1998). For example Wells et al. (1992) in an appraisal of 23 such projects in tropical countries point out that measurable progress in these efforts has been rare because the linkage between conservation and development is obscure.

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197

189

Therefore, the underlying causes for non-sustainable practices have to be carefully identied to design more effective conservation strategies. Assessing the resource use interests of local communities could provide insights into their relationship with the protected area (Holmes, 2003b). Resource use interest could be approximately measured by assessing attitudes towards the protected area (Holmes, 2003b). Many studies have shown that attitudes are related to resource use interest (Ineld, 1988; Newmark et al., 1993; De Boer and Baquete, 1998; Holmes, 2003b). But the link between attitudes and sustainable conservation practices is ambiguous (Holmes, 2003a). Community conservation efforts have had a recent history in India. The forestry policy inherited from the British raj has been traditionally exclusionary (Guha, 1983). Forests are managed by the Forest Department, which has complete control over the utilization of forest resources (Guha, 1983). Community-based conservation programmes such as the Van Panchayats (VP), a state level program was introduced in Uttaranchal and more recently the nationally designed Joint Forest Management (JFM) programs were implemented to address the conicts between the local communities and the Forest Department over access and use of forest resources (Ballabh et al., 2002). These institutions seek to incorporate local communities in regulating use of forest products (Ballabh, 1996; Ballabh et al., 2002). More recently, eco-development programs (EDP) funded by the World Bank have been launched in seven target National Parks, among communities living adjacent to or within protected areas (Mahanty, 2002). Among the implementing agencies were the Project Tiger Ofce at the Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi, the Village Ecodevelopment Committees, and various NGOs (Mahanty, 2002). The overall objectives of these community conservation efforts were to reduce household dependence on forest resources through incentives (Karlsson, 1999; Melkani, 2001). The community conservation efforts in India have met with mixed success partly because in many cases decision-making is vested with the Forest Department (Poffenberger and McGean, 1996; Ballabh et al., 2002; Mahanty, 2002). The success of many of these projects in reducing impact on the forest and in changing behavior towards more sustainable practices has not been independently evaluated. The KalakadMundanthurai Tiger Reserve (KMTR) was established in 1988 to conserve declining populations of the tiger (Panthera tigris) in the southern Western Ghats. The 900-km2 reserve ranges in elevation from sea level to almost 1900 m and supports a rich and unique biodiversity with a high proportion of endemic species (Johnsingh, 2001). The area along the eastern boundary of KMTR is farmed intensively and supports a human population of 100,000 living in 145 villages (Annamalai, 2002). KMTR was among the rst in India to implement an EDP in December 1994 for the villages surrounding the reserve. The objective of this 5-year project costing Rs. 91 million

(z2 million US$), was to create committed grass roots organizations such as Village Forest Committees (VFCs) under the umbrella of the Forest Department. The VFCs would then involve the local people in conservation, promote conservation awareness among the local communities, reduce resource dependency, and create alternative sources of livelihood (Melkani, 2001). Development initiatives in the KMTR included disbursement of smallscale loans for businesses, training opportunities such as free driving lessons, employment generation, and promotion of alternatives to forest-based energy sources (Annamalai, 2002). In 2000, 6 years after the EDP was launched by the Project Tiger administration at KMTR, we conducted a survey to understand whether the EDP had succeeded in reaching its objectives by assessing the attitudes of the local villagers after program implementation. Evaluations of resource use and attitudes of the local communities prior to project implementation were not available. We selected 12 villages adjacent to the eastern boundary of the reserve and assessed peoples attitudes towards conservation based on age, distance from the reserve boundary, socioeconomic status and benets garnered from the EDP. More specically we hypothesized that (i) attitudes would be an effective predictor of resource use interest and (ii) benets obtained from the EDP would create more favorable attitudes towards conservation and the protected area employees.

2. Materials and methods 2.1. Study site The KalakadMundanthurai Tiger Reserve (KMTR) covering an area of about 900 km2 is situated in the Agasthyamalai range of the southern Western Ghats, India. KMTR is located between 08825 0 to 08835 0 N latitudes and 77825 0 to 77835 0 E longitudes (Fig. 1). The Reserve ranges in elevation from sea level to almost 1900 m above sea level. This region is topographically diverse and supports vegetation such as dry thorn forests, deciduous forests, grasslands and wet evergreen rain forests. This region lies within the biodiversity hotspot of the Western Ghats and supports a high proportion of Western Ghats endemics (Johnsingh, 2001). KMTR also supports viable populations of endangered mammals such as the Tiger (Panthera tigris), the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) and the endemic Lion tailed Macaque (Macaca silenus). The eastern boundary of the reserve is a fertile region and has supported agricultural activities for centuries. The major source of livelihood for the local population centers on the cultivation of crops such as rice, bananas, sugarcane and groundnuts. These villages comprised mainly of lower castes following a traditional agriculture based life-style (Arjunan, 2004). The villages have increased in size over

190

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197

Fig. 1. Map of study area indicating study villages.

the past decade mainly due to population growth (Registrar General of India, 2001). About 145 villages near the forest boundary are composed of a large number of low-income households. These villages maintain about 10,000 cattle that often graze in the forest, and cause the degradation of foothill forest in the buffer zone of the KMTR (Dutt, 2001). About 66% of the households in this region were cultivators of which two-thirds were landowners. About 15% of the households were daily wage laborers, many of whom depended on the collection and sale of forest products for their livelihood (Arjunan, 2004). The forest areas near these settlements experienced moderate to high anthropic pressure due to removal of wood for fuel, small and large trees for poles and the collection of fodder for livestock and green leaves as fertilizer (Arjunan, 2004). All households, regardless of socioeconomic status use fuel-wood as a primary source of energy for domestic needs and each household uses an average of 5 kg of fuel-wood per day (Arjunan, 2004). Plant diversity assessment in forested areas frequented by the villagers for resource extraction, indicated that resource use among the local communities is not sustainable and will lead to forest degradation and loss. Sites that were heavily extracted had lower levels of species diversity, plant density and basal area, and little or no regeneration of target species, compared with sites with no extraction (Arjunan, 2004). The World Bank funded eco-development project (EDP) was initially launched for villages located within 5 km of the eastern boundary of KMTR, but has since expanded to cover 132 villages with 23,334 families (Annamalai, 2002). Twelve villages located within 3 km of the boundary were randomly selected for the present study (Fig. 1). The population sizes in the selected villages ranged from 202

individuals in Vembayapuram to 4902 individuals in Aladiyur (Table 1). 2.2. Data collection Data collection was carried out from December 2000 through August 2001. Population sizes, sex and age distributions, and average household incomes for each of the 12 focal villages were obtained from the most recent national census (Registrar General of India, 2001). These data were then crosschecked against information provided by local health centers, village council ofces, and village administrative ofces. Distances of the study villages from the KMTR boundary were obtained from the Forest Department, and ranged from 0.05 to 2.6 km. We interviewed a total of 677 men and women in the twelve focal villages, each representing a different household. For each village we attempted to interview at least two percent of the population above the age of 25 years (Table 1). Interviews were conducted conditional upon the individuals willingness to fully participate, and if at any point during the interview the individual expressed reservation, the interview was terminated. All interviews were conducted in Tamil and carried out by the rst author who has been conducting research on village economies, energy use and conservation in this region for over 2 years. As a result, he had won the condence of the villagers. The interviews contained a series of closed and openended questions relating to household demographics and residency, land use patterns, livestock ownership, and resource use patterns (Table 2: questions 119). Respondents were also asked a series of questions concerning their

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197

191

Annual income (kRs.)

51100

16 15 1 22 7 28 6 12 5 6 9 8 135

attitudes toward protection of the tiger (Panthera tigris), protection of the forest in the KMTR, and the Forest Department, which administers the protected area (Table 2; questions 2030). The tiger is an emblematic species in India, and the respondents opinion about tiger protection was used not only as a measure of their attitude toward Project Tiger, but also as a proxy for their general attitude towards wildlife protection. The interviews concluded with a question concerning services received from the World Bank funded eco-development project (Table 2; question 31). 2.3. Data analyses

O151 101150 !50

26 36 35 11 43 29 23 35 26 17 25 22 328

8 6 13 14 22 12 11 9 16 9 13 3 136

4 4 0 10 6 24 6 0 7 14 3 0 78

Data analyses were carried out in two stages. Bivariate tests were rst employed to determine if village distance, respondent age and/or sex, length of residency in the area, daily fuel-wood consumption, dependency on KMTR resources, and recognition of Project benets independently associated with an individuals attitude toward three conservation parameters: (i) conservation of the tiger, (ii) continued protection of the forest reserve, and (iii) support for the Forest Department. Cross-tabulations, reported as log likelihood chi-square values (c2), were used to determine the signicance of all binomial variables. Mann-Whitney U tests for comparison of ranks (U) and independent-sample T-tests (T) were used to determine the signicance of all continuous variables. To identify associations between wealth variation and reported attitudes, principle components analysis was employed to generate a socioeconomic status variable from respondents reported income, acreage of land owned, and number of cattle/buffalo and goats owned. Random effects logistic regression analyses (SAS, proc glimmix) were then used to determine the degree of associations between each of these variables and reported attitudes toward the three identied conservation parameters while controlling for the effects of all other variables. To account for potential clustering of variables at the village level, village was treated as a random effect in regression analyses. If, for example, average length of residency and village are correlated then the assumption of independent observations made by standard regression analysis is violated. In ordinary regression analysis, this clustering of observations may result in an underestimation of the standard errors of regression coefcients. Underestimation of standard errors may lead to Type I errors (identifying variables as having a signicant effect when the effect is due to chance). Random effects models can be used to overcome this problem (Littell, 1996). These models control for nonindependent observations by allowing variation at the village level with the inclusion of a village-specic random effect (Littell, 1996). All analyses were conducted at the 0.05 level of signicance using SPSS version 11 and SAS version 8.

56C Respondent in age categories (years) 4655 3645 2535 Women Men Women Men Respondents (number) Table 1 Description of the 12 study villages located along the eastern boundary of KMTR Total population Distance to reserve (km) Village name

Agasthiyapuram Aladiyur Anavankudieruppu Chidambarapuram Earmalpuram Kalakad-2 Manjuvelai Mungiladi Poothathankudieruppu Vadagarai Vadamalaisamuthram Vembayapuram Total

2.5 2.6 1.5 2 2.3 2.5 0.5 2.1 1 0.8 1.8 0.5

503 2052 419 1951 1180 2011 531 1002 421 1486 517 110 12,183

490 2046 412 1991 1178 2147 488 853 393 1420 505 92 12,015

37 42 32 40 53 74 31 34 33 31 34 18 459

17 19 17 17 25 19 15 22 21 15 16 15 218

11 9 8 22 13 18 6 10 4 5 7 6 119

21 33 23 17 33 24 13 22 22 26 24 14 272

17 15 11 10 22 35 15 14 19 10 16 6 190

5 4 7 8 10 16 12 10 9 5 3 7 96

192

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197

Table 2 Questions asked of sample households in the 12 focal villages to examine household demographic, residency, land use, livestock ownership, and resource use patterns, and to assess attitudes toward Tiger conservation, forest conservation, forest management and eco-development initiatives Personal/Household 1. What is your age? 2. How long have you lived here? 3. How many individuals live in your house? 4. What is your current occupation? 5. What was your past occupation? 6. What is your annual income? Land use patterns 7. Do you own land? 8. If yes, how many acres of land do you own? 9. What crops do you grow? 10. In which season(s)? 11. Do you own livestock? 12. If yes, what livestock do you own? 13. How many do you own? Resource use patterns 14. Which is the fuel source you use primarily? Open Open Open Open Open Open Yes/no Open Open Kharif/Rabi Yes/no Cattle/goats/ sheep/other Open Fuel-wood/ kerosene/L.P. G. KMTR/purchased/other Open Yes/No KMTR/other Yes/No KMTR/other Yes/No/No response Open Open Yes/No/No response Open Open Yes/No/No response Open Yes/No Open Open Yes/No Open

female headed households, but did differ signicantly between villages (fZ4.491, p!0.001), ranging from US$12002200. Average residency time also differed signicantly between villages (fZ1.953, pZ0.030), and ranged from 39.6 to 46.1 years. 3.1. Attitudes toward Tiger conservation, forest conservation and the Forest Department Greater than 50% of all respondents reported positive attitudes toward conservation of the tiger (61%, nZ408) and the forest (59%, nZ391). Of those in support of tiger conservation, 69% (nZ282) stated that the tiger had an innate right to live, and 31% (nZ126) favored tiger conservation because tigers stay away from the villages. Of those that opposed tiger conservation (28%, nZ185), 69% cited an inability to hunt and 31% cited wildlife-related crop damage. Support for forest conservation was largely driven by a reported belief that forest cover was responsible for good rainfall (86%, nZ336). The remaining 14% (nZ55) reported that forest conservation was important because it provided a reliable source of fuelwood. Of those who opposed forest conservation, 66% (nZ 140) pointed to an inability to collect fuel-wood and 34% (nZ71) cited an inability to graze livestock. Fifty-one percent of respondents reported a positive attitude toward the Forest Department (nZ336), with a number of reasons for this support being reported (Table 3). Twelve percent (nZ82) of respondents offered no opinion toward the Forest Department, compared to 11% (nZ72) for tiger conservation and 9% (nZ63) for forest conservation. Younger individuals reported generally more favorable conservation attitudes than older individuals, and were more likely to respond positively toward tiger conservation (tZK2.746, pZ0.006), forest conservation (tZK2.172, pZ0.030), and the Forest Department (tZK2.378, pZ 0.018). Women also reported generally more favorable
Table 3 Reasons given for supporting and opposing the Forest Department Support for the Forest Department Drivers education/license Tree planting Loan provider Daily employment Construction help Village meetings Provide energy efcient stoves Opposition to the Forest Department Loans offered are too small No villages meetings Loan dispersement is biased No control of crop raiding wildlife Loan interest rates are too high No employment opportunities They arrest poachers They have done nothing that benets me N 19 153 86 15 8 41 14 55 35 38 31 17 62 9 82 Percent 5.6 45.5 25.6 4.5 2.4 12.2 4.2 16.7 10.7 11.5 9.4 5.2 18.8 2.8 24.9

15. If you use fuel-wood, from where it obtained? 16. How much fuel-wood does your household use per day? 17. Do you collect green manure? 18. If yes, from where do you collect it? 19. Do you collect fodder? 20. If yes, from where do you collect it? Interactions with KMTR and KMTR employees 21. Is it necessary to protect The Tiger? 22. If yes, why do you feel this way? If no, why do you feel this way? 23. Is it necessary to protect the forest? 24. If yes, why do you feel this way? 25. If no, why do you feel this way? 26. Are the KMTR employees doing a good job? 27. Why do you feel this way? 28. Do wild animals cause you problems? 29. If yes, what types of problem(s) do you experience? 30. What measures should KMTR take to address the problems? 31. Have you received any benets from KMTR? 32. If yes, what type(s) of benets have you received?

3. Results A total of 677 individuals (459 men and 218 women) were interviewed during this study. The majority of respondents tended to be in the 3645 year age-class and in lower income groups (Table 1). Whereas the socioeconomic categories were representative of the villages, sex was more skewed towards males, and the older age classes. The average age of the respondents did not differ signicantly between the sexes or among villages. Average annual income did not differ signicantly between male and

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197

193

conservation attitudes than men; tiger conservation (c2Z 17.784, p!0.001), the forest reserve (c2Z17.081, p! 0.001), and the Forest Department (c2Z25.888, p!0.001). Villagers with shorter lengths of residency were also more likely to report positive attitudes toward tiger conservation (tZK4.996, p!0.001), forest conservation (tZK4.410, p!0.001), and the Forest Department (tZK3.840, p! 0.001). There was a marginally signicant inverse association between socioeconomic status and support for tiger conservation (tZK1.928, pZ0.054), and the Forest Department (tZK1.993, pZ0.047). No signicant association was found between socioeconomic status and attitude toward forest conservation (tZK1.710, dfZ600, pZ0.08). In considering associations between reported use of resources extracted from within KMTR and conservation attitudes, neither use of fuel-wood, green manure, and/or fodder that was reportedly collected from within KMTR associated with attitudes toward tiger conservation (c2Z 0.038, pZ0.845), forest conservation (c2Z0.373, pZ 0.542), or the Forest Department (c2Z0.577, pZ0.447). Similarly, there was no signicant association between daily fuel-wood consumption and conservation attitudes toward the tiger or the forest (tiger: tZK1.692, pZ0.091; forest: tZK1.363, pZ0.173). However, those who responded positively toward the Forest Department used on average signicantly less fuel-wood per day than those who responded negatively (tZK2.559, pZ0.011). There were signicant village-level differences in conservation attitudes toward the tiger (c2Z22.188, pZ 0.023) and the forest (c2Z23.046, pZ0.017). Village-level attitudes toward the Forest Department were also marginally signicant (c 2Z18.755, pZ0.066). This village-level variation was not, however, associated with distance of the villages from the forest boundary (tigers: uZ30171.5, nZ558, pZ0.106; forest reserve: uZ 33477.5, nZ558, pZ0.600; Forest Department: uZ 37078.5, nZ558, pZ0.770). Nor were there any villagelevel differences in recognition of benets received from the eco-development project (uZ52596.5, nZ665, pZ0.278). 3.2. Eco-development project benets About 60% of the women and 45% of the men received benets from the eco-development project. Respondents

who received benets from the World Bank funded ecodevelopment project were more likely to support tiger conservation (c2Z270.615, p!0.001) and forest conservation (c 2Z316.677, p!0.001). All respondents who received benets (nZ330) were also in support the Forest Department, whereas all respondents that reported no benets were in disfavor of the Forest Department (nZ 228). There was no association between recognition of benets received and socioeconomic status (tZK0.984, pZ3.26). However, among those that received benets individuals who reported positive attitudes toward tiger conservation had signicantly lower socioeconomic status (tZK2.105, pZ0.036) than those respondents who reported negative attitudes. This association was not signicant when considered with regard to attitude toward forest conservation (tZK1.023, pZ0.307). 3.3. Explanatory models of community attitudes Random effects logistic regression analysis indicates that among the variables independently identied as associating with conservation attitudes, sex, recognition of benets received, and length of residency associated with attitudes toward tiger conservation when the relative effects of all variables were controlled for (Table 4). Considering attitudes toward forest conservation, recognition of benets received and length of residency were also retained in the nal regression model (Table 5). In the case of tiger conservation, men were more likely that women to oppose tiger conservation, and with regard to both tiger and forest conservation increasing length of residency and a lack of benets recognition associated with reported opposition toward conservation efforts. In considering attitudes toward the Forest Department, regression analysis identied sex, socioeconomic status, length of residency and reported kg/day fuel-wood use as having signicant associations (Table 6). Because of the complete co-linearity between attitude toward the Forest Department and benets received these associations can be considered as predicting the likelihood that an individual would report recognition of benets received. As such, males were less likely to report receiving benets, and therefore less likely to support the Forest Department, as were respondents with increased socioeconomic status and

Table 4 Random effects logistic regression model of variables associating with negative attitudes toward Tiger conservation Effect Intercept Distance Sex (male) Socioeconomic status Benets (not recognized) Age Length of residency Estimate K4.2377 K0.2621 0.5622 0.02313 3.5045 K0.01690 0.04957 Error 0.8602 0.2062 0.2941 0.1283 0.3060 0.01732 0.01601 DF 10 576 576 576 576 576 576 t-Value K4.93 K1.27 1.91 0.18 11.45 K0.98 3.10 PrOjtj 0.0006 0.2042 0.0564 0.8570 !0.0001 0.3295 0.0021

194

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197

Table 5 Random effects logistic regression model of variables associating with negative attitudes toward forest conservation Effect Intercept Distance Sex (male) Socioeconomic status Benets (not recognized) Age Length of residency Estimate K3.6637 K0.1367 0.3032 0.04159 3.9283 K0.01743 0.03540 Error 0.8759 0.2479 0.2853 0.1293 0.2959 0.01669 0.01499 DF 10 585 585 585 585 585 585 t-Value K4.18 K0.55 1.06 0.32 13.27 K1.04 2.36 PrOjtj 0.0019 0.5817 0.2882 0.7478 !0.0001 0.2968 0.0185

greater lengths of residency. Increased daily use of fuelwood also expressed a marginally signicant association.

4. Discussion 4.1. Attitudes and resource use interest Conserving biodiversity in tropical countries is a challenge because a large proportion of the rural poor are dependent on forest resources for sustenance. Exclusion of people from forests in order to protect wildlife often antagonizes the local communities and creates an unfavorable climate for conservation. Community conservation efforts have been promoted as a way to address the livelihood needs of the local communities, and to encourage sustainable practices (Ineld, 1988; Newmark et al., 1993; Fiallo and Jacobson, 1995; Nepal and Weber, 1995; De Boer and Baquete, 1998; Gibson and Marks, 1995; Abbott et al., 2001; Holmes, 2003a,b). However, it is important to evaluate these programs to see if the original conservation goals have been met. Attitudinal surveys have been widely used as an indicator of the success of conservation programs (Fiallo and Jacobson, 1995; Ineld and Namara, 2001). But attitudes may not necessarily reect the resource use interest of the local community (Holmes, 2003a,b). Our study among the villages adjoining KMTR indicated that attitudes are a fairly accurate predictor of resource use interest. In general, livelihood concerns were associated with attitudes and persons who favored wildlife conservation were usually those with nothing to lose. For example, households affected by crop loss tended not to support wildlife

conservation and those who use forest resources were opposed to forest conservation. The World Bank funded EDP does not seem to have changed attitudes in a signicant manner except that the beneciaries are more favorably inclined towards the Forest Department. It has been shown that local communities more often than not support conservation efforts (Pennington, 1983; Harcourt et al., 1986; Ineld, 1988; De Boer and Baquete, 1998), but our study indicates that this support was contingent on livelihood interests. Socioeconomic factors in terms of wealth and landownership have been associated with positive attitudes (Ineld, 1988; Fiallo and Jacobson, 1995; Gibson and Marks, 1995; Nepal and Weber, 1995; Holmes, 2003b). In our study, wealth was linked to disfavor towards tiger conservation. The wealthier sections of society often suffer from crop depredation by wildlife and crop damage directly affected about 13% of the cultivators (Jeyasingh and Davidar, 2003; Arjunan, 2004). Therefore, the most cited reason against protecting the tiger, the surrogate for wildlife conservation, was the ban on hunting. Previously wild pigs, the most common crop raiders could be shot with a hunting license (Jeyasingh, 1999). Forest conservation was independent of socio-economic status because both the rich landowners and the poorer people use forest resources such as fuel-wood, fodder and green leaves for fertilizing the elds. The wealthier landowners extract these products directly from the forest and buy fuel-wood from the fuel-wood collectors. The poorer sections of the community, the fuel-wood collectors, depend on the sale of these products for their livelihood (Arjunan, 2004).

Table 6 Random effects logistic regression model of variables associating with likelihood of reporting recognition of benets received from the Forest Department Effect Intercept Distance Sex (male) Socioeconomic status Daily fuel-wood use (kg) Age Length of residency Estimate K2.9707 K0.1599 1.0799 0.2048 0.1559 0.003343 0.03128 Error 0.7668 0.2193 0.2081 0.09375 0.08394 0.01303 0.01191 DF 10 566 566 566 566 566 566 t-Value K3.87 K0.73 5.19 2.18 1.86 0.26 2.63 PrOjtj 0.0031 0.4662 !0.0001 0.0294 0.0637 0.7977 0.0088

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197

195

4.2. Do incentives lead to positive attitudes? Although on the whole, incentives did increase support for conservation, it was contingent on livelihood concerns. The effects of benets received on attitudes towards conservation provide additional support for our earlier conclusions. The wealthier households that received benets were less inclined to support tiger conservation. This was because they were both dependent upon forest products and were subject to wildlife related crop damage (Arjunan, 2004). Whereas attitudes towards forest conservation were not related to socio-economic factors. All that received benets supported the Forest Department. 4.3. Women and conservation attitudes Support for conservation came from the women, young people and younger residents. Women were more reluctant to offer an opinion than men, and when they did they tended to support conservation more than men. The reluctance to offer an opinion could indicate a disinclination to offer a negative opinion due cultural reasons. Forest protection affects the livelihood of fuel-wood collectors, almost half of whom are women (Arjunan, 2004). Women were targeted by the eco-development project for benets such as loans, and other schemes, and their participation in the Village Forest Committees was high (Annamalai, 2002). About two thirds of the women interviewed received benets from the EDP. Therefore, empowerment by the EDP could have made women more favorable towards conservation. 4.4. Traditional rights and conservation attitudes Traditional rights to the forest and cultural practices are important in inuencing attitudes (Badola et al., 1998; 2000). Residents and older people reminisced about the days when they could hunt freely, graze their cattle and collect products from the forest. The ban on such activities has created resentment. Declining to offer an opinion could be regarded as a negative attitude. Some villages are more traditional than others and have a higher proportion of long-term residents. Younger individuals and those with a shorter period of residency probably do not share the perception of the older people regarding traditional rights to the forest. The changing social milieu with better access to the outside world and TV and non-forest based employment opportunities could have played a role in creating more support for wildlife conservation among these sections of the community. Cultural attitudes should be easier to transform with education. 4.5. Reasons cited for supporting Forest Department The most important reason for supporting the Forest Department was tree planting, which garnered almost 50% of the responses. Tree planting along the roads does not

necessarily give any direct benet to a household and is along the same lines as the tiger has a right to live. However, the reasons cited against the Forest Department provide better insight into the minds of the respondents. The largest response (25%) was that the Forest Department has done nothing that benets me. Next was the inability to provide employment. This dual role of the Forest Department personnel in both policing the forest and running the EDP has created a schism in the minds of the local people. This paradoxical attitude has also been observed in other protected areas where ecodevelopment programs have been implemented (Baviskar, 2001; Mahanty, 2002). This is because the Forest Department has assumed the dual and contradictory role of facilitating the eco-development programs and enforcing forestry regulations. The Indian Forest Service was created by the colonial administration to manage the forest for timber production (Brandis, 1994). As the emphasis shifted to conservation in the 1960s, a wing of the Forest Department was created to administer the wildlife sanctuaries. The role of the Forest Department has widened upon implementation of the ecodevelopment projects, of which they are the main facilitators. This has resulted in an ambiguous relationship between the Forest Department and the local people (Baviskar, 2001; Mahanty, 2002). While the EDP has improved public opinion towards the Forest Department, especially among the local communities in KMTR, it has not resolved the important issues of livelihood loss and sustainable use of forest resources (Arjunan, 2004). 4.6. Do positive attitudes translate into sustainable practices? Positive attitudes might not necessarily translate into sustainable practices if only those who had no resource use interest in the protected area supported conservation. The dry forests in KMTR still provide about 50% of the fuelwood, fodder and green manure requirements of the local community. We found that the extraction of these products is non-sustainable. Target plant species have disappeared or show declining populations in heavily impacted areas (Arjunan 2004). The hot point stove run on kerosene was given to the villagers in order to wean them from forestbased fuel-wood. This experiment was not successful as kerosene was more expensive than the fuel-wood used in more traditional stoves. Fuel-wood, if collected purely for domestic use, costs nothing (Arjunan, 2004). Crop damage by wildlife is also a source of resentment among the cultivators. The EDP attempted to solve this problem by constructing a 8.7 km long electric fence to deter crop raiders, but this largely failed because the design was ineffective against the main crop raider, the wild pig (Jeyasingh, 1999; Jeyasingh and Davidar, 2003; Arjunan, 2004).

196

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197 Badola, R., Bharadwaj, A.K., Mukherjee, S.K., 2000. Integrating conservation and development in protected area management-Can we do it? Indian Forester, 10541067. Ballabh, V., 1996. Joint Forest Management in India: Promise and Prospects. Institute of Rural Management, Anand. Ballabh, V., Balooni, K., Dave, S., 2002. Local resources management institutions decline: a comparative analysis of Van (Forest) panchayats and forest protection committees in india. World Development 30, 21532167. Barrett, C.B., Arcese, P., 1995. Are integrated conservation-development projects (ICDPs) sustainable on the conservation of large mammals in Sub-Saharan Africa? World Development 23, 10731084. Barrett, C.B., Arcese, P., 1998. Wildlife harvest in integrated conservation and development projects: linking harvest to household demand, agricultural production and environmental shocks in the Serengeti. Land Economics 74, 449465. Baviskar, A., 2001. States, communities and conservation: the practice of eco-development in the Great Himalayan National Park. In: Saberwal, V., Rangarajan, M. (Eds.), Battles Over Nature, Science and the Politics of Wildlife Conservation. Brandis, D., 1994. Forestry in India. Natraj Publishers, New Delhi, India (reprinted). De Boer, W.F., Baquete, D.S., 1998. Natural resource use, crop damage and attitude of rural people in the vicinity of the Maputo Elephant Reserve, Mozambique. Environmental Conservation 25, 241249. Dutt, S., 2001. Beyond 2000: a management vision for the KalakadMundanthurai Tiger Reserve. Current Science 80, 442447. Fiallo, E.A., Jacobson, S.A., 1995. Local communities and protected areas: attitudes of rural residents toward conservation and Machalilla National Park, Ecuador. Environmental Conservation 22, 241249. Gibson, C.C., Marks, S.A., 1995. Transforming rural hunters into conservationists: an assessment of community-based wildlife management programs in Africa. World Development 23, 941957. Guha, R., 1983. Forestry in British and post British India: a historical analysis. Economic and Political Weekly 18, 19401947. Harcourt, A.H., Pennington, H., Weber, A.W., 1986. Public attitudes to wildlife and conservation in the third world. Oryx 20, 152154. Holmes, C.M., 2003a. The inuence of protected area outreach on conservation attitudes and resource use patterns: a case study from western Tanzania. Oryx 37, 305315. Holmes, C.M., 2003b. Assessing the perceived utility of wood resources in a protected area of western Tanzania. Biological Conservation 111, 179189. Ineld, M., 1988. Attitudes of a rural community towards conservation and a local conservation area in Natal, South Africa. Biological Conservation 45, 2146. Ineld, M., Adams, W.M., 1999. Institutional sustainability and community conservation: a case study from Uganda. Journal of International Development 11, 305315. Ineld, M., Namara, A., 2001. Community attitudes and behaviour towards conservation: an assessment of a community conservation programme around Lake Mburo National Park. Uganda. Oryx 35, 4860. Jeyasingh, P.., 1999. Crop depredation by the Indian wild pig Sus scorfa cristatus at fenced and unfenced areas on the eastern boundary of the Kalakad - Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve. M.S. thesis, Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India. Jeyasingh, P.D., Davidar, P., 2003. Crop depredation by wildlife along the Eastern boundary of the Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (KMTR), southern India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 100, 3845. Johnsingh, A.J.T., 2001. The Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve: A global heritage of biological diversity. Current Science 80, 378388. Karlsson, B.G., 1999. Eco-development in practice: Buxa Tiger Reserve and forest people. Economic and Political Weekly, 20872094 (July 24).

5. Conclusions Arresting biodiversity loss in tropical countries is a challenge due to the dependence of a signicant section of the rural community on forest resources. Creation of protected areas while controlling unregulated resource extraction often creates conict with the local communities. Our study shows that attitudes are a good indicator of the resource use interests of the local community living adjacent to KMTR. In general, positive attitudes indicated a lack of resource use interest in the protected area. The developmental initiative provided by the World Bank funded eco-development project has not adequately addressed the issue of forest based livelihoods. Therefore, eco-development projects need to be carefully designed to attain particular conservation objectives. Attitudinal surveys and assessments of resource use by the local communities should be conducted prior to project implementation. This would have helped to identify the main concerns of the local communities, and assisted in designing a more effective intervention program. Periodic assessments by an independent agency to evaluate the attainment of program goals are crucial for the success of the program.

Acknowledgements This study was funded by a grant from the MacArthur Foundation grant to the University of MassachusettsBoston and Pondicherry University. We thank Dr Bawa for logistical support and Prof. Gunasekaran for helping with study design. Comments by two anonymous reviewers greatly helped to improve the quality of the manuscript. Dr Annamalai and the staff of the Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve helped by providing information on the eco-development project and logistical support at all times.

References
Abbott, J.I.O., Thomas, D.H.L., Gardner, A.A., Neba, S.E., Khen, M.W., 2001. Understanding the links between conservation and development in the Bamenda Highlands, Cameroon. World Development 29, 11151136. Annamalai, R., 2002. Eco-development in Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, India. Status Report. Tamilnadu Forest Department, Govt. of Tamilnadu, 219. Arjunan, M., 2004. Protected areas and people: a case study of forest resource use and human impact in the Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Pondicherry University, India. Badola, R., Bharadwaj, A.K., Rathore, B.M.S., 1998. Sharing benets of conservation emerging scenarios in people-PA relationships in India, Paper Presented in National Seminar on Biodiversity Conservation Challenges and Opportunities, October 910. Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education 1998.

M. Arjunan et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 79 (2006) 188197 Kiss, A., 1990. Living with Wildlife: Wildlife Resource Management with Local Participation in Africa. The World Bank, Washington DC, USA. Littell, R.C., 1996. SAS System for Mixed Models. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC. Mahanty, A., 2002. Conservation and development interventions as networks: The case of the India eco-development project, Karnataka. World Development 30, 15911605. McNeely, J.A., 1995. In: McNeely, J.A. (Ed.), Expanding Partnerships in Conservation. Island Press, Washington DC, USA. Melkani, V.K., 2001. Involving local people in biodiversity conservation in the Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve-An over view. Current Science 80, 437441. Nepal, S.K., Weber, K.E., 1995. Prospects for coexistence: wildlife and local people. Ambio 24, 238245.

197

Newmark, W.D., Leonard, N.L., Sariko, H.I., Gamassa, D.M., 1993. Conservation attitudes of local people living adjacent to ve protected areas in Tanzania. Biological Conservation 63, 177183. Oates, J.F., 1995. The danger of conservation by rural development: a case study from the forests of Nigeria. Oryx 29, 115122. Pennington, H. 1983. Tanzanian attitudes towards wildlife and conservation. M. Sc. thesis. Yale University, New Haven, USA. Poffenberger, M., McGean, J. (Eds.), 1996. Village Voices, Forest Choices: Joint Forest Management in India. Oxford University Press, Delhi. Registrar General of India, 2001. Census of India. }Govt. of India publication. Wells, M., Brandon, K., Hannah, L., 1992. People and Parks: Linking Protected Area Management with Local Communities. The World Bank, Washington DC, USA.