Forest tenure regimes in the Western Ghats region of Karnataka are complex and poorly understood. We present first a framework for understanding such regimes. A detailed description of the regimes prevailing in this region, including the layering of products and actors, operational and constitutional rules, tenurial security, geographical distribution and extent, basis in the law, and administering agency for each distinct regime follows. We also comment on the original role of the regimes, their evolution and the implications for forest policy.

Background

In 1995, the Institute for Social & Economic Change and the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security initiated a major research project to look at the relationship between tenurial and economic factors on the one hand and people's use and the ecological outcome on the other in the Western Ghats forest region of Karnataka State in peninsular India. As one of the first steps in this effort, we began a study to understand the diversity of forest tenure regimes prevailing in this region. Our initial enquiries into the nature of forest rights in the Karnataka Western Ghats region produced a rather confusing picture. On the one hand, official documents such as the Annual Reports of the Karnataka Forest Department (KFD) indicate only five legal categories of forests: Reserve Forests, Protected Forests, Unclassed Forests, Village Forests, and Private Forests. Further, they suggest that the vast majority of forests are under the direct control and management of the State forest department, because the area under the first two categories is 84 per cent of the total 'forest' area reported by them, while that under the last two categories was only 1.2 per cent'. On the other hand, observations made by us during visits to the field and discussions with local persons and bureaucrats indicated a much more complex situation. Terms such as soppinabettas, kumkis and baanes cropped up repeatedly. Furthermore, people talked about various other privileges, supported by Government Orders (G.O.s), High Court decisions, and other obscure rules. But it was very difficult to both authenticate and place these in the overall context of the region.'