 |
|
|
|
The Orissa Tribal Development Project (OTDP) implemented a component for land surveying and settlement, which resulted in the allocation and distribution of dongar (hill) lands to the tribal population in Kashipur block. Until recently, the population in the block were making use of the dongar lands in an informal manner, as and where possible, for agricultural purposes (mainly shifting cultivation). However, access to these lands was not secure and consistent; and land productivity was low.
The benefits of legally secure land tenure are evident from the OTDP experience. From an agricultural point of view, the allocation of parcels of lands and the provision of land titles has reduced shifting cultivation practices, which has consequently promoted relatively sound environmental management practices and helped restore agro-ecological balance. It has also substantially increased the productivity of these lands. From a socio-economic point of view, the project illustrated that when land titles are registered in the names of both spouses, the social and economic status of women is enhanced, providing them with greater security, confidence and independence. It has also provided them with more opportunities for income-generation through activities such as vegetable gardening and small livestock rearing. Overall, then, the ownership of even a tiny piece of land has improved the economic conditions of those concerned. It may be noted that a somewhat better level of literacy was also observed among the beneficiaries.
The Orissa evaluation mission witnessed another feature of prime concern in the land reform process under the project, which concerned the implication on community ownership and management of forest lands and water. Such and other common property resources are particularly important for tribal people, since they derive a large part of their income and nutrition through the processing, consumption and sale of minor forest products. But, as mentioned above, much of the community owned land was individualised, and land titles were recorded jointly in the names of both spouses. While this step was welcome, the package of privatisation of property upset the existing social security for the tribals. Now smallholders in distress could either lease their land to moneylenders and others, or be mobilised by the development process for eviction, settling for cash compensation for their piece of land. In fact, the latter was observed in several areas in Orissa as a result of the development of alumina projects funded by multi-nationals. Hence, such land reform programmes need to be accompanied by opportunities for employment and marketing, access to rural financial services, and institutional support. Provision of such services will contribute to fully unleashing the potential and productivity of the targeted populations.
With
regard to the protection of the tribals rights over community forests
and other lands, following the central legislation introduced in 1996,
the Gram Sabha (Village Assemblies) in the tribal areas has been entrusted
to protect the community rights over community land and forest. The OTDP
has preceded this Panchayati Raj enactment, and unfortunately this power
is not being exercised by the Panchayats in many tribal areas (in Kashipur
itself, the Government of Orissa (GOO) has notified the transfer of tribal
land to the alumina project companies without consulting the local Panchayats).
Moreover, some community lands have also been encroached upon by the rich
and powerful. Therefore, projects and programmes promoting land reform
should simultaneously pay sufficient emphasis on the management and conservation
of community resources such as forest lands. Furthermore, the communal
rights of the tribal people over such areas should be safeguarded, as
they form an integral part of the overall production system of the tribal
populations.
References:
1. Completion Evaluation Report (214-IN)
2. Evaluation Report of Govt. of Orissa 1998
3. WFP Project Completion Report 1998
