Course:CONS200/2024WT1/Colonial legacies in forest conservation regulation in India

Prior to colonization by British powers in the 18th century, the indigenous peoples of the Indian subcontinent possessed a dynamic history of forest conservation practices and values. Through the ages, their practices varied in ecological stability, ranging from ethics of restrained use and conservation, to exhaustive use and degradation. With Britain's increased control over India came changes to forestry practices, worldviews, and governance, adhering to European industrial standards of the time. Policies such as the Indian Forest Act were established to benefit the Crown, ensuring their control over forest management and the provision of timber. Despite gaining independence in 1947, the country continues to operate by a colonial framework of forest management and conservation.

Pre-colonial forest conservation practices

'The Sacred Hindoo Grove near Chandod on the Banks of the Nerbudda'

Pre-agricultural society (Pleistocene–Early Holocene)

Early civilization on the Indian subcontinent consisted of nomadic hunter-gatherer, pastoralist, and shifting cultivator communities. The peoples of this era directly relied on natural resources for food, construction materials, and fuel, and mainly collected these resources from forests. Most often, the management of an area of land was shared, conducted by the community that was currently using it. As it was in their best interest to conserve their forests for the continued survival of their families, strict regulations were agreed upon for what areas could be harvested, and to what extent. Using this model of management, local human populations tended to grow steadily until they reached equilibrium with their resource base.

Practices

The peoples of this time were for the most part animistic, regarding nature as sacred, property of the gods, or dwelling sites for ancestral spirits. Thus, forestry practices were based upon the principle of restrained use. For instance, some natural features, including trees, groves, or ponds, were under taboo from resource extraction. A prominent practice across pre-agricultural India was the designation of sacred groves, which are communally protected forest fragments with strong religious or spiritual value. The communities that managed these forests typically prohibited hunting, logging, and cultivation within their boundaries, though some allowed sustainable collection of resources such as dead wood or leaf litter. As a result, sacred groves retain a high level of species diversity and ecological functioning while providing cultural and provisional services to nearby communities. Certain species like Ficus (fig) trees were also worshipped, and forbidden from being killed or cut down.

In some areas, including what is now the states of Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Odisha, woodlots were specifically designated for communal fuelwood extraction. Depending on the season, each family in the area was set a limit to how much they could harvest. Restrictions were also sometimes placed on extraction methods, for example, the ban on cutting trees with metal implements in Rajasthan orans.

Agricultural society (Early Holocene–c. 1865)

Conflict between sedentary and nomadic groups

The introduction of intensive cultivation of staple grains to the subcontinent caused an emergence of sedentary agricultural societies. Sedentary agriculturalists, with their stable food supply, had the means to increase in scale and power. Hinduism became the dominant religion, shifting the focus of spirituality to more abstract subjects, such as fire, water, or war. Sedentary agriculturists are believed to have regarded nomadic peoples as uncivilized or demonic, and frequently took control of communal lands, shifting management rights to rulers and governments. Sacred groves were converted to venerating Hindu deities. Nomadic groups were restricted to practicing their conservation traditions in regions unsuited to cultivation, such as hills and malarial forests.

Greater attention was paid to the anthropocentric benefits of managing forests and cultivating plants, both practical and spiritual. Some practices were ecologically harmful—Yajna, a form of Vedic ritual, often involved starting fires and eating animal fat, which consumed large amounts of woodfuel and diminished local animal populations. Other practices paid more attention to ecological processes such as interspecies interactions, and water and nutrient cycling, as seen in the Vrikshayurveda. Written around 1000 BC, the Vrikshayurveda was an important scriptural text on agricultural and horticultural science. Alongside recommendations for planting, maintenance, and harvesting practices for various plant species, it describes the material and spiritual benefits of planting certain trees. In addition, forests were reserved by the monarchy for raising elephants for war, show of wealth, and for recreational hunting.

Influence of new religions

Emerging within the first millennium BCE, Jainism and Buddhism became prevalent belief systems in India. This was perhaps in response to diminishing lands and resources available for expansion, as contrary to the preceding religions, Jainism and Buddhism opposed uncontrolled resource consumption and encouraged the respect and fair treatment of nature. The adoption of these religions marked a return to earlier conservation traditions, and is postulated to have curbed resource use throughout the subcontinent. Some sacred groves were designated around Buddhist monasteries as well.

Forestry in colonial India

Teak tree plantation

The British colonial administration’s approach to forestry was heavily influenced by the economic needs of the British empire, such as supplying timber for railways, shipbuilding, and keeping up with demands from the industrial revolution. The management and exploitation of forests during this period led to significant changes in land use, forest structure, and local communities’ relationships with the forest. The forestry practices that were put in place were built in order to optimize and commercialize the harvest of trees such as sal and teak, the woods of which were increasing in demand. Policies such as the Indian Forest Act of 1865 were implemented to restrict and regulate the use of forests by the local communities so that it could instead be used for commercial uses, and traditional land use practices were replaced with monoculture plantations, which had negative impacts on local ecosystems. The Indian Forest Act of 1865 marked a turning point in colonial forest management by declaring forests as state property and restricting traditional practices like shifting cultivation, grazing, and firewood collection, which displaced forest-dependent communities and prioritized timber extraction for colonial industries.

Indian Forest Service

Indian Forest College, Dehradun, IFS Batch-1938-40

History

India is one of the first countries in the world to have stated scientific management of its forests. The root of the Indian Forest Service (IFS) can be found in early 19th century attempts to control timber supplies, especially teak, which started in 1806 with conservation measures. Officially, the IFS's origins date back to 1864, when the British India Government started the Imperial Forest Department and appointed Dr. Dietrich Brandis, a German forester, as the Inspector General of Forests. The Imperial Forest Service was established in 1867 after it was determined that a premier forest service was necessary to manage the diverse natural resources of the large nation and to coordinate the operations of the Imperial Forest Department. While official training for IFS officials was introduced in the same year, the training was first given in Europe and then at several institutions in the United Kingdom. The officers who served in the Imperial Forest Service between 1867 and 1885 received their training in Germany and France. After that, they received their training at Cooper’s Hill in London, which at the time was one of the most prominent professional institutions of forestry, until 1905. The Imperial Forest Service officers were trained at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Edinburgh between 1905 and 1926. In 1906, the Imperial Forest Research Institute, Dehradun, widely referred to as FRI worldwide, was founded in Dehradun. Later, in 1938, the Indian Forest College was founded in Dehradun, where personnel hired by the states and provinces to serve in the Superior Forest Service received their training.

The British Indian government published the Provincial Forest Service and Executive & Subordinate Services, which were very similar to the current forest administrative hierarchy, after realizing the value of a multi-tiered forest administration in the federal and provincial governments for efficient management of forest resources.

Training was shifted to India in 1926 when the Forest Research Institute was established in Dehradun, but it was put on hold for a while because of the lack of interest. Previously under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government, the “Forestry” subject was moved to the “Provincial List” by the Government of India Act, 1935. The Imperial Forest Service therefore stopped accepting new recruits. The service’s principal responsibility is to carry out the National Forest Policy, which calls for the sustainable use of forests for primary timber products and scientific forest management, among other things. Since 1935, provincial governments have been in charge of managing the nation’s woods, and the Forest Departments continue to do so under the auspices of the individual state governments.

The Indian Forest College was established in 1938 in response to the demand for skilled foresters, with a primary focus on sustainable forest management for the production of lumber. After 1935, state governments took over control, as one of the three All India Services, the Indian Forest Service, was officially established by the Indian government in 1966 in accordance with the All India Services Act of 1951 in the first place. After 1977, the federal government began to play a bigger role. The focus shifted to biomass demands and biodiversity conservation when the IFS was reconstituted. More than 2,700 IFS officers are currently employed in a variety of roles; they are chosen through the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) test, and many of them have graduate degrees in related subjects.

Goals and Challenges

The Indian Forest Service developed over 90 years into a skilled body focused on “making the forests of India serve the needs of the people.” The IFS navigated complex challenges from “established habits of forest exploitation the commercial interests,” aiming to balance economic needs with ecological preservation. Its groundbreaking research has impacted forestry methods in other tropical areas, supporting global efforts to practice sustainable management.

Continuation of Colonial Practices

Continuation of the IFS under the Indian Government

Even after independence, the IFS continues to have a strict hierarchy that is then further subdivided by regional states, which further expands into several different areas of conservation at the regional level such as social forestry, territorial management, and wildlife management. This rigid hierarchial structure greatly limited the flexibility of forestry governance across the country.This division and lack of cohesion had caused issues for national forestry policies, as these state level policies often differed in their approaches to conservation and sustainable forestry, making it difficult to uphold a singular national standard for conservation and sustainable land use.

Current Management of Conservation Efforts

India's forest management is deeply influenced by colonial-era policies that prioritized state control and exploitation of resources for economic gain, like timber for shipbuilding and railways. Colonial policies such as the Indian Forest Act of 1878 institutionalized state control over forests, creating a legacy of exclusion that persists today. The British approach of 'scientific forestry' prioritized maximizing commercial timber output, disregarding indigenous knowledge systems and community-led conservation practices. This legacy continues in modern forest management through centralized decision-making structures and the marginalization of local communities.

Reforms and Persisting Challenges

Despite post-independence efforts to incorporate community participation, the system remains largely top-down, favouring forestry institutions and local elites over genuine community involvement. Modern initiatives, such as Community Forest Management (CFM), aim to increase local input but often fail to reach marginalized communities, leaving them resource-deprived and excluded from meaningful decision-making processes. Though Community Forest Management (CFM) was intended to decentralize forest governance and involve local communities, its implementation has been hampered by enduring colonial-era power imbalances. Forest departments often dominate decision-making processes, sidelining marginalized communities and reinforcing exclusionary practices reminiscent of colonial control.

Exclusion and Power Imbalances

CFM initiatives aimed at increasing local input frequently fail to reach marginalized communities, leaving them resource-deprived and excluded from meaningful decision-making processes. The hierarchical and state-driven structure creates conflicts between the livelihood needs of forest-dependent communities and the state’s conservation and industrial goals. Cultural differences among stakeholders—including forest departments, local committees, and NGOs—further complicate collaboration, as economic or conservation priorities tend to serve elite interests while disregarding marginalized populations.

Cultural and Structural Barriers

Collaboration among forest departments, local committees, and NGOs is complicated by cultural differences and conflicting priorities. The persistence of colonial "scientific forestry" practices that treat forests as marketable resources persist, often overshadowing community-based approaches that emphasize social and ecological benefits. This combination of centralized control, elite influence, and fragmented organizational priorities undermines efforts toward sustainable, inclusive forest conservation in India.

Post-independence Reforms and Initiatives

The Minister of State for Environment and Forests (Independent Charge), Shri Jairam Ramesh presides over the valedictory session of the National Seminar on “Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006: Implementation, Livelihoods and Forest Conservation,” in New Delhi on March 29, 2011.

Legislative Reforms

Post-independence, India introduced several key reforms to laws to manage and conserve its forests and natural resources. Policies such as the Forest Policy (1952) aimed to increase forest cover to 33% of its total land area by making plantations to recover deforested areas, and the Forest (Conservation) Act (1980) mandated state approval for non-forestry land use, promoting compensatory afforestation. These reformed polices were put into place with the objective of preserving indigenous culture and values and promoting sustainable land in order to balance both environmental and economic development. Another notable reform is the amendment of the Forest Rights Act in 2006, which recognized the rights of local communities, particularly tribal populations, who depended on forests and its resources. Previously, forests and forested areas were classified into one of 3 categories; restricted, protected, or unclassed, with restricted forests having the most protection with all activities within being prohibited unless otherwise stated. This created issues for local communities that relied on these forests for resources as in prior iterations of this policy. Indigenous communities were forcibly removed and restricted from accessing forests in order to maximize timber production for economic gains. The amendment aims to undo the restrictive and exclusionary colonial-era polices, and provides legal recognition and rights of local communities to access and manage their forest resources. These policy changes push for more inclusive and sustainable forest management strategies in India.

Despite these reforms, there are still challenges in balancing conservation and sustainability goals with the interests of local communities. There are issues of underrepresentation of marginalized groups in the decision-making process such as women and people of lower castes, whose voices often go unheard. Programs such as the Community Forest Management (CFM) promote the collaborative governance of forest resources between state governments and local communities.

Conclusion

Forestry and conservation in India is shaped by the complex interactions between indigenous culture, colonial legacies, and post-independence policy reforms. Even as the country transitioned from a nomadic lifestyle to a more settled agricultural community, forests remained a vital source for both economic and spiritual need. Indigenous peoples historically viewed forests not just as sources for fuel and food, but also as sacred places that held great spiritual significance, with many of the sacred forests and mangroves having trees that were forbidden to harvest. Many communities practiced sustainable land management strategies with community-governance where the management of trees and forests where emphasized as a collective responsibility, and promoted sustainable use of the forests and its resources.

Post colonization land use in India underwent a significant transformation due to the economic interests of the British Empire. The forests were seen as a commodity for industrial purposes, as valuable as raw materials such as teak and sal were harvested to fulfill the growing demand for timber and other forest products needed for building British ships, railways, and construction. Policies and organizations such as the Indian Forest Act and Indian Forest Service were introduced to regulate and control forest resources and to maximize the harvesting of forest resources, which often meant restricting access of local communities who relied on these forests for their livelihood. The traditional management of forests were also altered to make extraction of resources as efficient as possible, with little regard to sustainability. The legacy of these policies, which prioritized state control and economic exploitation over local needs and ecological sustainability, continues to influence India's forest management practices today.

Post-independence has made significant strides in reforming its forestry policies to promote conservation,sustainability, and the rights of local forest-dwelling communities with policies such as the Forest Policy of 1952, Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980, and the Forest Rights Act of 2006 aiming to conserve and protect forest resources while also promoting economic developments for the locals. By recognizing and the rights of forest-dwelling communities, India has made strides in amending previously exclusionary policies, which often marginalized local communities in their opinions for the management of forest resources. These policy changes aim to create a more inclusive and diverse forest management strategies by empowering local stakeholders, to actively participate in decisions regarding land use, resource allocation, and conservation policies. While challenges still exists, with marginalized groups such as women, and people of lower castes remain underrepresented in decision-making, recent amendments to restrictive policies and new inclusionary initiatives such as Community Forest Management (CFM) offers hope for progress and programs such as these create an opportunity for these communities to manage forest resources collectively, improving their livelihoods while maintaining the health of the forests and trees.  While there are many avenues for improvement still, these efforts mark significant steps in the direction of achieving sustainable, equitable, and community-led forest management in India.