Institutional responses to development pressures: Resilience of social-ecological systems in Himachal Pradesh, India

被引:19
作者
Bingeman, K [1 ]
Berkes, F [1 ]
Gardner, JS [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manitoba, Nat Resources Inst, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
关键词
resilience; institutions; India; forest; management; sustainability;
D O I
10.1080/13504500409469815
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In the Kullu District, Himachal Pradesh, India, economic and urban growth, and diversification have increased pressure on forests and forest-based social-ecological systems. As in many Himalayan regions, livelihood sustainability is linked to forest resources, products and services. Recent development in the region, to which these systems may be vulnerable, brings into question environmental and livelihood sustainability. This paper examines the resilience of integrated systems of people and nature, or social-ecological systems, in the face of development pressures by evaluating a number of local and state-level institutional responses. Resilience, which describes the ability of the social-ecological systems to adapt to change by buffering shocks, improving self-organization and increasing capacity for learning, is an essential quality. for sustainable development. Institutional responses which positively contribute to resilience and sustainability include the work of mahila mandals in forest management, adoption of joint Forest Management (JFM) policies and practices, upholding rules, strengthening local institutions, establishing firewood depots and adopting alternative energy sources. Institutional failures brought about by the lack of rule enforcement and corruption erode resilience. The analysis of institutional responses helps to identify areas where capacity exists and areas in which capacity building is needed to produce resilient social-ecological systems and therefore, sustainable development.
引用
收藏
页码:99 / 115
页数:17
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   Social and ecological resilience: are they related? [J].
Adger, WN .
PROGRESS IN HUMAN GEOGRAPHY, 2000, 24 (03) :347-364
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1999, PASTORAL POLITICS SH
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1996, Rights to Nature. Ecological, Economic, Cultural, and Political Principles of Institutions for the Environment
[4]   Diversity of common property resource use and diversity of social interests in the western Indian Himalaya [J].
Berkes, F ;
Davidson-Hunt, I ;
Davidson-Hunt, K .
MOUNTAIN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 1998, 18 (01) :19-+
[5]   Comparative aspects of mountain land resources management and sustainability: case studies from India and Canada [J].
Berkes, F ;
Gardner, JS ;
Sinclair, AJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND WORLD ECOLOGY, 2000, 7 (04) :375-390
[6]  
Berkes F, 2003, NAVIGATING SOCIAL EC
[7]  
Berkes F., 2002, Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems
[8]  
Berkes F., 1997, Sustainability of mountain environments in India and Canada, P1
[9]  
Berkes F., 2002, DRAMA COMMONS, P293, DOI DOI 10.17226/10287
[10]  
CHHATRE A, 2000, INT ASS STUD COMM PR