Facts of economic contribution of forest and wildlife

Prof. Omprakash Arun Sonone,

Assistant Professor, Dept. of Commerce,
Chintamani College of Commerce, Pombhurna, Dist- Chandrapur
Email: bkomsonone@gmail.com, Mo.- 8698908051
Abstract:
Forest and wildlife were neglected area in economic development of country. Now a
day’s world is conserving, preserving and utilizing forests and wildlife. The world is not only
accepted forest as a natural heritage but also considered an important aspect of economic
development. In this research researcher studied that worldwide countries are conserving forests
and protecting wildlife. Forests and wildlife are reproductive source of forest products. The study
suggests that non cash benefits of forest have to be significantly recognized and measured as
direct or indirect contributors in economic growth. The government has to pay attention on
contribution of forest and wildlife in employment generation, poverty elevation, industrialization
and encashment of forest products and work for conservation and development of forest &
wildlife.

Key Words: forest, wildlife, contribution, economy, products, etc.

Objectives:

researcher studied secondary data with the following objectives

i. To understand the current position of forest and wildlife.

ii. To find out the economic aspects of forest and wildlife.
iii. To evaluate the economic contribution of forest and wildlife.
iv. To find out the scope of forests and wildlife in economic development.

Introduction:

Till the pre half of 20th century forests were neglected by most of the economist in the
role of economic development of the nation. Many economists suggested to the developing
countries would need to follow the path of transformation from agrarian to industrial economics
adopted by the developed countries. Forests were viewed as a source of land to be converted to
more productive use. Forest industries other than pulp and paper were considered too small to be
significant for industrialization.
Forests contribute in economic development by many ways directly or indirectly like
source of natural capital, production inputs and environmental goods. Forest and wildlife within
provide a wide range of economic benefits through processing and trade of forest products,
employment generation, cultural-spiritual and recreational business. It is difficult to calculate the
actual economic contribution of forest due to wide range of cash and non-cash products of
forests. Forests are beneficial in poverty reduction by food and fodders are mostly collected in
rural areas by poor people for livelihood. There is a tendency to underestimate the contribution
of forests – and off-farm natural resources in general – to livelihoods, and the role of forests in
poverty reduction has so far not been reflected in any significant way in national level strategy in
most countries (FAO 2010).
Many economic contributions of the forests are not covered in cash contribution so it is
unrecognized area. The informal sectors of forest are unidentified for the authority responsible
for forest management. So the research and data management is required to help the decision
makers as key areas like poverty elevation of economic contribution.

The researcher used secondary data for the study in which annual reports, special studies,
research articles, online materials, journals, etc. are included. This research studied the current
position of forest in India and worldwide. The researcher urged to find out the economic
contribution of forests and wildlife and scope of the respective area.

Forests and reservoirs in India:

The total forest cover of the country as per State of Forest Report 2003 is 678,333 km²,
which constitutes 20.64 percent of the geographic area of the country. Of this, 51,285 km²
(1.56%) is very dense forest, 339,279 km² (10.32%) is moderately dense forest and 287,769 km²
(8.76%) is open forest cover. The mangrove area in the country is 4461 km 2 (0.14%) of the
country’s geographic area. The non-forest cover excludes scrub and is estimated to cover an area
of 2,568,661 (78.13%) km². As far as the National Wildlife Database (2017) is concerned there
are 18 Biosphere Reserves are exists in India in 91272.22 km2; there are 46 existing Community
Reserves in India covering an area of 72.61 km2, which is 0.002% of the geographical area of
the country; there are 76 existing Conservation Reserves in India covering an area of 2567.95
km2, which is 0.08% of the geographical area of the country; Elephant Reserves covering 69,582
km2; Project Tiger was launched by the Government of India in the year 1973 to save the
endangered species of tiger in the country. Starting from 9 reserves in 1973-74 the number has
grown up to 48 in 2015. A total area of 68,795.72 km2 is covered by these tiger reserves, which
is 2.09% of the total geographical area of the country. There are 544 existing wildlife sanctuaries
in India covering an area of 118,931.80 km2, which is 3.62 % of the geographical area of the
country.

Review of Literature

Deninger & Minten (2002) studied probability of deforestation at the plot level at two poor
Mexican states with high levels of biodiversity. This study suggested that serious problems are
likely to arise from neglect of physio-geographic factors related to elevation, infrastructure
access, and soil fertility. This implies that, while in practice some aggregation may be tolerable,
the results from studies that use only socio-economic variables should be treated with great
caution.
Maskey (2006) the study found that participation in community forest management is based on
the socio-economic profile of an individual and the level of participation is determined by the
benefits obtained from the common forest resources. Lack of participation in community forest
management excludes the disadvantaged groups from decision-making in product distribution.
Income from forest environmental sources occupies the second largest share in average total
household income next to crop income. Poverty and inequality analyses show that incorporating
forest environmental incomes in household accounts significantly reduces measured rural
poverty and income inequality. They suggested that sustainable forest management schemes
should be adopted to maintain and enhance the flow of economic benefits to the surrounding
communities without damaging the natural resource system.

Shackleton (2011) suggested in Suggestions for enhancing women’s benefits include: greater
recognition of informal markets, the opportunities and constraints associated with them, and their
position relative to export markets; improved support for collective action where this can provide
women with greater voice, negotiating power, and help with economies of scale; more targeted
training that addresses areas identified by women as useful and important to them; time-saving
technologies and support systems such as child care.

Volker, M & Waibel, H. (2010) the study suggests that forest protection efforts promoted by
conservationists need to be combined with poverty reduction programs taking into account the
degree of vulnerability of the local population.

Ferraro (2012) Ecosystem service is fundamentally an economic concept. This offers economists
a unique and important opportunity to contribute to the emerging literature on ecosystem
valuation and policy effectiveness.

UNFF (2013) Greater integration between the forest and other sectors are a precondition to
enhance the recognition of the economic contributions of forests. Such integration will require
major changes in policies and institutional arrangements. For these arrangements to work
successfully, forest professionals will also need to be far more open to improved connections
with those outside the forest sector. Illegal and unsustainable harvesting in many countries, at
times accompanied by political violence and social unrest, make problems related to forest
economic contributions a matter of national concern and competition.

Angelsen (2014) environmental income shares are higher for the poorest households. Broadly
households in the highest income quintile have absolute environmental and forest incomes that
are about five times higher than the two bottom quintiles. This implies that local income growth
and poverty alleviation probably do not automatically take pressure off natural resources.

Fikir, D., et al. (2016) studied local livelihood and dependency on dry land forest products and
found that income from forest products contributes 21.4% of the total annual household income.
The major dry forest products include honey, fuel wood, gum and resin, and crafts and
construction materials, contributing 49%, 39%, 6%, and 6% of the forest income, respectively.
Households of the pastoral site earned more forest income and were relatively more dependent
on forest products income than those in the agropastoral study site.

Economic facts of forest and wildlife

Contribution in GDP: The United Nations Forum on Forest UNFF (2013) mentioned the
monetary contributions of forests to the economies of the developing world are taken into
account, they exceed US$ 250B (Rs. 1587681 crores) – easily more than double the flow of total
development assistance and more than the annual global output of gold and silver combined.
These direct, cash exchange based contributions of forests represent approximately 1% of the
global output. UNFF moderated available data and found that economic contributions of forests
have fallen by more than 50% on a number of key economic dimensions since the 1980s: from
more than 1% to less than 1.6% of the formal global GDP; from 0.4% to a little less than 0.7% of
the formally employed labor force; and from more than 2.4% to less than 3.5% of total
merchandise exports.
In 2002, forestry industry contributed 1.7% to India's GDP. In 2010, the contribution to
GDP dropped to 0.9%, largely because of rapid growth of the economy in other sectors. French
accounting system shows trade-offs between the economic, ecological and social functions of
natural resource. This system is known as the ‘Natural Patrimony Accounts’. It prepare separate
accounts for forests, wildlife, water and soil.

Debt for nature swap: is an important concept which means ‘an arrangement whereby a foreign
debt owed by a developing country is transferred to a particular Non Government Organization
or to the government, typically in return for the country's committing itself to specified
conservation measures’. In it mostly the forest and wild life conservation projects established.

Foreign trade: forests and wildlife are the source of revenue. It balance the foreign exchange
and financial equality. Forest products may be exported and can be use as import substitution in
the form of fiber, wood, medicinal, specified forest products, ornamental, industrial raw material
and energy products, etc. India, Canada, Italy, Malaysia, etc. are using timber as a primary
source of capital as forested nations. Loas, Myanmar and Viet Nam are ready to pursue the
similar strategy. Thailand exports furniture, orchids, specialty foods, medicinal and wildlife.

Forests and wildlife products: there are so many product of forests and wildlife which includes
many products of timber, fuelwood, food, herbs, medicinal, animal body parts and products, etc.
many products has cash value and many products does not have it.

Photography & Videography: now a day’s professional photography and wildlife videography
is increasing industry. Society is adopting and enjoying dynamic photography and discovery of
wildlife.
Tourism and recreation: According to Edgar Kaeslin, Forestry Officer in Wildlife and
Protected Area Management at FAO, “Ecotourism has a far greater potential for contributing to
income and livelihoods in poor rural communities than what is realised”. About 103 national
parks in 40500 km2 are available in India. These are opened for recreational activities as a source
of revenue.

Industrial Contribution: many large and small scale industries of forest products like wood,
firewood, timber, pulp and paper, medicinal, etc. are contributing vital role in economic
development. Also the household products like silk, cigarette wrappers, food and feed, charcoal,
oils, lac and resins, spices and medicines products produced in forest area.

Employment generation- forests are only source of income for many people living in the forest
area. The population living nearby the forests runs the home made production industries. Forest
is the main source of raw material required for these industries. As far as information in UNFF
(2013) study is concerned more than 13 million people are employed in forest sector activities in
the formal sector; in the informal sector of small and medium forest enterprises, another 40‐60
million people may be employed. Forest Connect Report on Nepal (2012) found that one‐third of
rural people in Nepal collect and trade forest products, which generated US7.66 million in 2010
and benefitted 78,828 participants.

Medicine: Some medicinal plants grow at the specific environment. Forests are the natural
places where these types of farming can be take place. Also some animals have medical
importance which easily conserved and protected at reservoirs area. Ayurveda is mostly use the
forest medicinal plants for medical treatment.

Infrastructure: timbers are used for construction work, furniture, wooden boats, small bridge,
etc. In village area poor population build their house with forest trees and bamboos. Also the
farmers use bamboo and thorny bushes as a fence to farm. Bullock cart is an ancient transport
device mostly made by wood. Wood is used to produce farming tools.

Source of Energy: fuel wood is mostly used in remote areas and villages. Fossil fuel
requirements can be expensive for foreign exchange to the country. So the countries like Africa
and South Asia emphasis on fuel wood plantation.

Food security and livelihood: poor from villages and forest area collect food and fodders for
livelihood. UNFF recognized that non‐cash economic contributions of forests to household and
national economies range between 3 and 5 times the formally recognized, cash contributions.
There is enormous need of research and sociopolitical awareness to use forest and wildlife for
poverty elevation.

Conclusion & Suggestions:

 Forest and wildlife were insignificant area in economic development of country. Now a
day’s governments of forest nations are conserving and developing forests and wildlife as an
economic aspect. World is serious about deforestation and expressing urge to conserve forest and
forest animals. There are reproductive cash and non cash forest products are produced which has
economic impact on economy. There is enormous scope in research and economic activities in
forest and wildlife area. The study suggests that non cash benefits of forest have to be
significantly recognized and measured as direct or indirect contributors in economic growth. The
government has to pay attention on contribution of forest and wildlife in employment generation,
poverty elevation, industrialization and encashment of forest products and work for conservation
and development of forest & wildlife.

Bibliography:
1. Agrawal, A., et al. (2013) United Nations Form for Forest (UNFF) “Economic Contributions
of Forests” Tenth Session April 2013, Istanbul, Turkey
2. Angelsen, A., Jagger, P., Babigumira, R., Belcher, B., et al. (2014) “Environmental
Income and Rural Livelihoods: A Global-Comparative Analysis” World Development
Vol. 64, pp. S12–S28.
3. Babulo, B., Muys, B., Nega, F., Tollens, E., Nyssen, J., Deckers, J., and Mathys, E.
(2009) ‘The economic contribution of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in
Tigray,   Northern Ethiopia’. Forest Policy and Economics, Vol. 11 (2), p 109-117.
4. Deninger, K. and Minten, B. (2002). Determinants of Deforestation and the Economics
of Protection: An Application to Mexico. American Journal of Agricultural Economies.
84(4), p 943‐960.
5. Falconer, J. and Arnold JEM, (1991) Household food security and forestry: an analysis
of socio‐ economic issues. Community Forestry Note 1, FAO, Rome.
6. Ferraro, P. J., Lawlor, K., Mullan, K., and Pattanayak, S. (2012). "Forest Figures:
Ecosystem Services Valuation and Policy Evaluation in Developing Countries." Review
of Environmental Economics and Policy 6(1): 20‐44
7. Fikir, D., Tadesse, W., and Gure, A. “Economic Contribution to Local Livelihoods and
Households Dependency on Dry Land Forest Products in Hammer District, Southeastern
Ethiopia” (2016) International Journal of Forestry Research Vol. 2016, Article ID
5474680, 11 pages.
8. Maskey, V., Gebremedhin, T., and Dalton, T. (2006). "Social and cultural determinants
of collective management of community forest in Nepal." Journal of forest economics
11(4): 261‐274.
9. Mathur, A. and Sachadev, A. (2003) ‘Towards an Economic Approach to Sustainable
Forest Development’, Perspective Planning Division Planning Commission Government
of India, Working Paper Series Paper No. 2/2003-PC
10. Organization for Economic Development and Co‐operation Development Assistance
Committee. (OECD‐DAC 2008). “Measuring Aid to Forestry”.
http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/41699327.pdf
11. Ramage, M., Burridge, H., et.al. (2017) “The wood from the trees: The use of timber in
construction”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 68, p. 333–359
12. Shackleton, S., Paumgarten, F., Kassa, H., Husselman, M., and Zida, M. (2011b)
“Opportunities for Enhancing Poor Women's Socioeconomic Empowerment in the Value
Chains of Three African Non‐Timber Forest Products”  International Forestry Review,
vol 13(2):136‐151.
13. Vedeld, P., Angelsen, A., Bojo, J., Sjaastad, E., and Berg, G. (2007). “Forest
environmental incomes and the rural poor.” Forest Policy and Economics, Vol. 9(7):
869‐879.
14. Volker, M and Waibel, H. (2010) “Do rural households extract more forest products in
times of crisis? Evidence from the mountainous uplands of Vietnam” Forest Policy and
Economics Vol. 12: 407–414
15. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forestry_in_India, 12-01-2018
16. fsi.nic.in/documents/annualreport.pdf, Forest Survey of India, Annual Report 2005-06
(retrieved on 14th Jan, 2018)
17. www.ascotiaoffqueen.com/tourtravel/forest-tourism-a-green-path-toward-sustainable-
forestry/ (13-01-2018)
18. www.fao.org/docrep/t4450e/T4450E0l.htm (13-01-2018)
19. www.greenfacts.org/en/forests/l-2/8-economic-social-benefits.htm (13-01-2018)
20. www.wii.gov.in/ (13-01-2018)