The goal of this project is to support the development of effective policies and programs that enable communities to manage forestlands and watersheds in northeast India. While laws and policies for many states and districts in the northeast provide communities with significant forest rights, in recent decades there has been a tendency to extend national forest policies of India to the region, undermining the ancestral domain claims of indigenous tribal peoples. Due to the unique historical and socio-cultural environment in the northeast, a special policy framework needs to be created to reflect the special rights of community groups over forest resources. Community empowerment through enabling resource management programs and policies is urgently required given the growing external pressures on timber resources from private sector operators, migrant peoples, and corrupt elements within the state governments. 

In Phase I, the project will establish a CFM Working Group for Northeast India with representatives from the seven states plus members from CFM groups, NGOs not to exceed sixteen people. The CFM Working Group will be responsible for reviewing case study reports and policy assessment studies to make recommendations to the Central and state governments regarded appropriate policy actions at the end of Phase I.

A brief description of the structure and function of the CFM Working Group is provided below.

Act as Secretariat for the CFM Working Group. The secretariat will take responsibility for managing Working Group activities. This will include the commissioning of case studies, hiring, training, and supervision of consultants. 

The CFM Working Group will include one senior forest department officer from each state, as well as representatives from selected communities, NGOs, and relevant other institutions.

During the first Phase of the project, three meetings of the CFM Working Group will be convened at approximately six monthly intervals. The meetings will be held for one day and will be based in Shillong. The meetings will focus on 1) Discussion of the CFM Policy History of the Northeast Review and Approval of Project Design, 2) Review of the State Profiles and Case Study Reports, and 3) Formulation and Approval of Policy Recommendations 

The facilitator will provide technical support to the CFM Working Group secretariat and will be responsible for guiding the development of the group operations, meeting agendas, and outputs. The Facilitator will also provide guidance in the selection of case study areas, research consultants, and the preparation of the final case study reports and policy recommendations.

ELDF will be responsible for producing a paper describing the legal and policy history affecting forests in Northeastern India and how they differ from peninsular India and its emerging JFM policy environment. ELDF will also prepare three northeast district level case studies of forest policy and legal contexts and three village level case studies (one from each district) describing indigenous/local resource management systems and how forest policy and legal contexts impact community forest use practices. Finally ELDF will provide the CFM Working Group with legal and policy recommendations regarding ways to improve the forest policy environment to better meet the unique northeast India context and reduce conflict between community and government, create opportunities for more sustainable use, and enhance protection against internal and external threats to forest resources and watersheds.

Conduct background research on the state of community forest management in the seven states of the region and produce a status paper for each state (Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Megalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, and Tripura) and forward to CFI and Facilitator. The state profiles should include a review of the forest history, cultural and policy environment in each state, a status report on forest cover and amount of area under community forest management, and an assessment of management issues affecting each state.

Identify existing studies on CFM and forest management in northeast India, both "grey literature" and published reports. The CFM WG Secretariat will prepare an annotated bibliography of all reports, articles, and books describing the CFM context in the northeast.

Secretariat staff will work with the Facilitator to identify seven case study sites for CFM profiles. The staff will identify and contract local consultants from each of the seven states to prepare the CFM case studies. The secretariat will organize a methods workshop to compile CFM case studies in collaboration with the Facilitator. The Secretariat staff will review and revise case study reports for approval by the Working Group and forward to the Facilitator for further improvement. The CFM case studies should cover the following topics. The length will be approximately 40 to 50 pages, with additional maps, diagrams, and tables.

The goal of this section is to identify important events in the establishment of the community and its development over time. This has particular importance in terms of land tenure, as original settlers often have proprietary rights over land and resources.

Important questions include:

a) Settlement: Who were the original settlers of the area? Where did they come from? When was the village established? What was the condition of the forest and wildlife at the time of settlement? When did additional families arrive? 

b) Land Use and Economic: What was the pattern of conversion of forest lands to agriculture? When were new land use systems started (these include padi cultivation, commercial plantings, commercial logging, mining, etc)? If State FD has done any forest demarcation or projects in the area, what happened and when? When other important government or Ngo projects were undertaken?

c) Infrastructure: When did road access/transportation change (i.e. building of road or bridges)? When where communication linkages established (i.e. phone, TV, radio, etc.) 

d) Socio-Political: When missionaries first started operating in the community? When schools or health clinics were established? When new village government structures where introduced (i.e. related to panachayti raj or other national or state polices)

e) Timeline of Events

a) Cultural beliefs: What are the traditional cultural beliefs of the community regarding the forest? Who are the deities that occupy the forests? What are they associated with (water, tree species, places, etc)? How do cultural beliefs regarding the forest affect use behavior? What animal and plant species were held sacred?

b) Traditional Resource Management Institutions: Identify and describe the traditional leaders and institutions that supervised forest use in the community and between communities? How were leaders selected? How were conflicts resolved? How were offenders punished? 

c) Traditional System of Forest and Resource Tenure? How were forests and land held? What resources where held under tribal leaderships, communal management, short-term private stewardship, long term private stewardship, or private property of household? What were the rules governing transfer of usufructs or sale if any?

PRA Sketch map of Community Lands - This can be a community sketch map, but will need to be transcribed onto paper for publication. It maybe based on the micro-watershed area or whatever area is under the tenure control of the study community. The map should indicate different indigenous or local management categories giving both local name as well as English translation. Categories should include local designations for: a) protected areas -sacred grove, headwater forest, watershed forest, etc, b) utilization forests - for timber/ntfp extraction, jhum cultivation, etc. note please indicate sites of jhumming and rotational pattern, c) padi lands and other agricultural areas under sedentary farming systems, d) household forest gardens, e) settlement area. Approximate scale will likely be between 1:5,000 and 1:10,000 depending on the size of the area. 

Explanation of the PRA Sketch Map - For each land use type the consultant should write a description regarding a) tenure status of that land type, b) rules and regulations governing use, c) use practices and rights, d) products flows by type, season, and volume, e) management problems, issues, and opportunities, f) directions of change in the use of that land type, including tenure, technology, productivity.

This section would describe and assess forest resources management institutions within the village and between villages. Mechanisms for coordination and conflict resolution would be described.

This section of the report would describe how community-based resource management is linked and coordinated with local and state government agencies. The report would also detail community relationships with state forest department, identifying were the relationship is supportive or creating problems. Finally the report would describe how outside private sector is impacting the community forests and it's management resource decision making. The Facilitator would provide guidance regarding the assessment of the role and impact of the state forest departments.

In at least three case study areas, the staff of ELDF would assess community knowledge of past and current forest policies affecting them. This section would evaluate both knowledge and attitudes towards these policies.

The consultants, in conjunction with the the CFM Secretariat Staff, the Facilitator, and the ELDF legal consultants will assess current management problems in the case study areas, and suggest strategies to address them at a policy and operational level.

Work Plan Time Frame - CFM in Northeast India
(Note: Approximate and Subject to Modification)

2002

• November 15, 2002 - CFI sends NAEB/NEHU and Facilitator
  Inputs for Project Workplan and Consultant TORS - 
  November 20th Facilitator submits comments on inputs to CFMWG Secretariat

• December 1, 2002 - NAEB/NEHU Contract Approved 

• December - First Payment to CFMWG Secretariat

• December 31, 2002 - NEHU/NAEB Submits Project Work Plan and Consultant TORs to CFI and Facilitator

• January 31 - Annotated Bibliography of existing case studies and other publications concerning CFM systems in the Northeast

• January - February - Facilitator works with CFMWG Secretariat to begin identifying Case Study sites and Consultant, Selection of Working Group Members

• March - 1st Meeting of CFMWG in Shillong - Discussion of Case Study Sites - Objectives of CFMWG

• April - Preparation of Methods Design Workshop

• May - Methods Design Workshop for Project Consultants

• June - October - Consultants Field Work - Field Visits by CFMWG Secretariat and Facilitator 

• March - August 2003 - CFMWG Secretariat -Writing of State Community Forest Management Profiles (10 pages per state minimum)

• August - 2nd Payment to CFMWG Secretariat

• November-December - CFMWG-Secretariat Revisions of Case Studies

• December 31, 2003 - Seven case studies of CFM systems based on consultant reports

• January (End) - 2nd CFMWG Meeting - Discussion of Case Study findings -
  Preliminary Recommendations for CFM Development in the Northeast

• February- CFMWG Secretariat Publishes Minutes of the 2nd CFMWG Meeting

• March - June - CFI and Facilitator Integrate State Profiles, Revised Case Studies and Recommendations for Action into Final Report

• April - Third Payment to CFMWG Secretariat

• July - September - Production and Publication of CFMWG Report on
  Northeast India

• October - 3rd CFMWG Meeting - Review Final Report and Discuss Plans for Phase Two of the CFM in Northeast India Program

• November 30, 2004 - CFMWG Secretariat Submits Minutes of 3rd CFMWG Meeting and Final Project Report

• To what extent are rights and concessions granted to communities in the northeast during the colonial and post-colonial period recognized and operational at the field level? (ELDF)

• To what extent do village and district councils effectively represent the interests and rights of tribal communities as local resource managers? 

• To what extent have JFM resolutions confused or diluted the rights of tribal communities in the Northeast?

• How do CFM practices and degrees of community forest control vary between scheduled and non-scheduled states and districts?

• In what states and districts in the Northeast is CFM functioning most effectively? Why?

• How is the different CF legal and policy environment between peninsula and the northeast affecting forest management on the ground?

• How is the role of Forest Department different between the Northeast and the rest of India different? 

• What actions do the forest departments in the northeast need to take to better respond to problems and opportunities in developing CFM at a policy level and on the ground?