No abstract

No abstract

We evaluated the livelihood linkages of existing tourism practices in Kaziranga National Park, a World Heritage site located in Assam, India. The main objective of the study was to assess the contribution of tourism to local livelihoods and suggest ways to strengthen these linkages. Focus group discussions and interviews of tourism service providers were carried out to identify their share of tourism income. A survey of tourists was conducted to examine the amount spent by visitors while visiting the park. The primary data was supplemented by secondary information obtained from the park office, service providers and records of village self-help groups. In 2006-2007, the total amount of money that flowed through the tourism sector in Kaziranga National Park was estimated to be US$ 5 million per annum, of which different stakeholders (excluding government) received US$ 3.27 million per annum. The balance of income flowed as leakage for purchase of supplies and logistic support outside the tourism zone. The financial benefits to local stakeholders may increase if the leakages could be prevented through planned interventions such as proper marketing of products from cottage industries and strengthening of local level institutions. In addition to wildlife viewing, promotion of nature trails and package tours may be encouraged in the buffer zones and adjoining forests areas to enhance tourist visitation to un-tapped sites that could provide additional livelihood options to local communities.

We examined existing policy instruments of the Indian forest, wildlife, and environment sectors for the period 1927-2008 to (a) assess their strengths and weaknesses in addressing information, market and policy failures in ecosystem service provision in the Indian Himalayan region and (b) determine if they were informatory or regulatory in nature and whether they encouraged the use of market-based instruments. Our analysis revealed that Indian policy measures can be categorized into four eras: Production (1927-1972), Protection (1972-1988), Community Participation (1988-2006, and Climate Change and Globalization (2006 onwards). The policies of the earlier two eras were largely regulatory in nature. From 1988 onwards, community participation in biodiversity conservation has made the policies more informatory and marketbased. The recognition that Himalayas are a distinct ecosystem, crucial for their services but vulnerable to climate change impacts, has come about only with the National Mission on Sustaining Himalayan Ecosystem. Given the multiple stakeholders in Indian Himalayas and the off-site nature of ecosystem services, a complementarity of instruments and their ability to address the consequences of local decisions on downstream ecosystem services are essential. A participatory and sectorally coordinated mixed governance approach is needed to sustain ecosystem services in the region.

No abstract