Impact of Forest Policies On Timber Production in India A Review

Natural Resources Forum 40 (2016) 62–76 DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.
12094
Impact of forest policies on timber production in India: a review

Mili Ghosh and Bhaskar Sinha
Abstract
Until the 20th century, forest policies across the globe focused primarily on effective forest utilization for timber
production. Subsequent loss of forest land prompted many countries to review and amend such policies, in an attempt
to incorporate the principles of conservation and sustainable forest management. One of the countries to implement
such changes was India, which introduced new policies, acts and programmes to regulate forest conversion and degra-
dation, beginning in the 1980s. These policies, acts, and programmes included the Forest Conservation Act of 1980,
the National Forest Policy of 1988 and the Hon. Supreme Court Order of 1996. All of these regulations affected the
timber supply from government forest areas, and created a huge gap in timber supply and demand. Currently, this
deficit is met through imports and trees outside forests (TOFs). Timber production from government forest areas is
abysmally low (3.35% of total demand) compared to potential timber production from TOFs, which fulfil 45% of the
total timber demand in India. This implies that TOFs have immense potential in meeting the growing timber demand;
however, they have not been fully utilized due to discrepancies in state level TOFs’ policies. The present paper pro-
vides a review of different forest policies, acts and guidelines in relation to timber production in India, and provides
specific recommendations in order to maximize timber production in the context of increasing demand for timber
products.
Keywords: Forest policy; timber production; trees outside forests (TOFs); timber supply and demand.
1. Introduction promote sustainable forest management and biodiversity

conservation, and to restrict uncontrolled timber logging.
Until the 20th century, forests across the globe were spe- Additionally, more forest land was designated for the
cifically managed for timber production to meet industrial conservation of biological diversity under the new man-
demand, and there was increasing pressure to divert forest agement plans.
land for agricultural use to meet the demands of the India too witnessed a similar change from timber
growing population. The Food and Agriculture Organiza- removal to biodiversity conservation, as reflected in its
tion (FAO) estimated an annual loss of about 16 million policies and programmes related to forest management.
ha of forest between 1990 and 2000 due to agricultural Previous forest policies, such as the Forest Policy of
use, timber removal and natural causes, with a higher rate 1894; 1952, gave precedence to agriculture over forestry
of loss in Latin America, South East Asia and Congo as a land use option, and forest lands were converted
(FAO, 2010). However, with an increasing emphasis on for agricultural purposes, without restrictions (Joshi
biodiversity conservation, the principle of managing for-
et al., 2011). Further to the previous forest policies, the
ests shifted to their sustainable use rather than exclusively
Forest Act of 1865; 1878; 1927 also gave preference to
managing them for timber production. As a result, exist-
timber production and logging for revenue generation
ing forest policies, laws and national forest programmes
(Guha and Gadgil, 1989; Joshi et al., 2011). The
in various countries across the globe were revised to
decrease in forest cover and biodiversity raised concerns,
and in 1988 the National Forest Policy (NFP) was for-
Mili Ghosh is a PhD Scholar at the Indian Institute of Forest Management, mulated, which put timber logging secondary to biodi-
Bhopal, India. E-mail: [email protected] versity conservation. Then in 1996, the Hon. Supreme
Bhaskar Sinha is a faculty member in Ecosystem and Environment Manage-
ment at the Indian Institute of Forest Management, Post Box: 357, Nehru
Court of India passed an order that led to a complete
Nagar, Bhopal, India. E-mail: [email protected]/bsinha@iifm. ban on the unregulated felling of trees or timber logging
ac.in in government forest areas, except those in which a
© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations
14778947, 2016, 1-2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1477-8947.12094, Wiley Online Library on [15/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Mili Ghosh and Bhaskar Sinha / Natural Resources Forum 40 (2016) 62–76 63
working plan1 was prepared by the state government supply and demand in India, resulting in the import of tim-
and approved by the central government. ber. Increasing wood production from government RFAs,
In turn, such regulations on tree felling reduced the sup- as well as through TOFs, will not only help curb the grow-
ply of timber from government forests starting in the mid- ing gap in timber supply and demand, but will also lead to
1990s, while the demand for timber has significantly an increase in carbon sequestration, which will assist in
increased due to population growth, infrastructural devel- promoting mitigation and adaptation of measures with
opment, economic growth and industrialization. This has regard to climate change. This paper attempts to review
resulted in a huge gap in timber supply and demand due to and analyse the impact of different policies, acts and guide-
a shortage of production from domestic sources, thus lead- lines that have affected both production and demand of
ing to a sevenfold increase in imports over the past timber in India over the course of the past 60 years.
20 years. Simultaneously, the option of increasing timber Admittedly, it is difficult to establish causality and
production from trees outside forests (TOFs) to meet measure success of policy in a comprehensive way due to
domestic demand also gained importance. the involvement of significant complexities in assessing a
Globally, TOFs are defined as trees standing on land not particular dimension of the policy (Marsh and McCon-
designated as forest or other wooded land (Kleinn, 2000), nell, 2010). However, the forest policies of India are
covering an area of less than 0.5 ha, and found in agricul- implicitly embedded with three objectives, namely, con-
tural lands, agroforestry systems, home gardens, orchards, servation, restoration and production. As a result, the
urbanscapes – including along roads – and scattered in the comprehensive analysis of any forest policies should be
landscape (FAO, 2014). In India, TOFs are defined as trees assessed on the basis of the performance of these three
growing outside government recorded forest areas (RFAs)2 indicators. The current paper attempts to evaluate the dif-
(FSI, 2013), which include trees growing on community ferent policies, acts and guidelines related to forest man-
land, roadsides, farms, private land, and revenue land. agement in India, with a focus on understanding their
However, the assessment and reporting of TOFs in India is implicit and explicit impacts in the context of timber pro-
done under two outputs, namely, tree cover and growing duction. While doing this, we also discuss the impacts of
stock3 by the Forest Survey of India (FSI), and has been forest policies in relation to conservation outcomes in
referenced in the biennial State of Forest Report (SFR) terms of forest cover and growing stock, and have further
since 2001 (FSI, 2001) through two specific assessments explored the possibility of enhancing timber production
(TOFs rural inventory and TOFs urban inventory). Further, from TOFs in India.
India is the only country in the world that conducts a In most of the policy analysis, there are significant meth-
nationwide assessment of TOFs in rural areas (FAO, odological difficulties posed due to a lack of information,
2013). The term ‘tree cover’, as reported by the govern- data and the difficulty in identifying the causal effect of a
ment, is defined as patches of TOFs in areas covering policy, which is further constrained because of overlapping
between 0.1 and 1 ha (FSI, 2011; 2013; 2015a). Patches of policies, economic and political forces (Marsh and McCon-
TOFs that are more than 1 ha are included in the assess- nell, 2010). The absence of an exclusive policy on timber
ment and reporting of forest cover,4 and therefore there is production and inconsistent and unavailable data on such
no exclusive and exact assessment for TOFs in India. production further poses challenges in establishing the
The India State of Forest Report (2011) estimated timber causal relationship between forest policy and timber pro-
production from government forests to be 3.17 million m3, duction. The policies and acts were studied for approxi-
and potential timber production from TOFs, including mately 150 years, beginning in the colonial era, and lasting
industrial plantations, social and farm forestry to be until 2012. However, due to a lack of data collected from
42.77 million m3 (FSI, 2011). That being said, current the colonial era through 1965, the policies from this time
demand for timber is almost twice the total production and period could only be studied on the basis of reviews and
as previously mentioned, this creates a huge gap in timber reports, while the policies after this time period could be
studied both on the basis of reviews and reports, along
1
A working plan is an official guiding document, prepared by the Forest with collected data. The study is oriented to benefit the
Department in India, on the principles of sustainable forest management forestry sector of the country through the promotion of
and innovative silvicultural practises. The plan is prepared by the state sustainable timber production, and also in improving the
government and approved by the central government every 10 years at the
monitoring of different aspects of forests in India.
division level (GoI, 2014a).
2
Recorded forest area (RFA) refers to all geographic areas (irrespective
of canopy density) recorded as ‘forests’ in government records, revenue
records or areas constituted under any state act or law (FSI, 2015a). 2. Review of forest policies across the world
3
Growing stock of forests, or TOFs, is defined as volume over bark of
all living trees standing or growing in the specified area (FSI, 2013;
The top tropical log producing countries of the world, iden-
FAO, 2014).
4
Forest cover includes all lands that have a tree canopy density of 10% tified by the International Tropical Timber Organization
and above, and a minimum mapping unit of 1 ha. It encompasses all types (ITTO) are India, Indonesia, Brazil and Myanmar, with
of land irrespective of ownership, land use and legal status (FSI, 2015a). 23.7%, 51%, 59.3% and 46.1% of forest area, respectively
64 Mili Ghosh and Bhaskar Sinha / Natural Resources Forum 40 (2016) 62–76
Table 1. Countries and their forest policies, laws or orders pertaining to forest conservation
Country Years Event Features References
Myanmar 2014 Log export ban Bans wood exports ITTO (2013)
Indonesia 1985 Log export ban Promotes domestic timber industry in the country Guritno and Murao (1999)
Malaysia 1992 National Forest Policy Sustainable Forest Management Certification Practices Rahim and Shahwahid (2012)
Thailand 1989 Logging ban Encourages forest protection Miyamoto et al. (2014)
Ecuador 1996–97 Logging ban Bans logging in natural forests Sierra (2001)
Costa Rica 2007 Forest Management Policy Protects forests McGinley and Cubbage (2011)
Directives
USA 1926, 1990 Log export ban Bans wood exports WRI and WBCSD (2013)
Brazil 1969 Log export ban Bans certain wood exports WRI and WBCSD (2013)
Ghana 1995 Log export ban (LEB) Policy Substitutes export of log to timber products; reduces the rate of Amoah et al. (2009)
exploitation of natural forest resources
Cameroon 1994 Forestry law Checks illegal logging and unsustainable forest management Alemagi and Kozak (2010)
(World Bank, 2016). Currently, the ITTO has 68 member exploitation (Dadebo and Shinohara, 1999; Amoah et al.,
countries, out of which 34 countries are timber producing 2009; Alemagi and Kozak, 2010) (Table 1).
countries (ITTO, 2013; 2014). Among all ITTO producing Apart from the above-mentioned countries, there are
countries, the top four countries accounted for 65% of nations worldwide that have initiated policies and regula-
ITTO production in 2013 (ITTO, 2013). Although a major tions to curb deforestation and degradation through manag-
producer of logs, India depends greatly on imports from ing timber extraction (Petersen and Sandhovel, 2001;
Myanmar, Malaysia, New Zealand, China, Germany, Gautam et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2004; Diete et al., 2005;
Thailand, Papua New Guinea, Ghana, and Ecuador (ITTO, Spies et al., 2007; Pacheco et al., 2010; Kotilainen and
2013). Over the years, India’s log import has been increas- Rytteri, 2011; Redo et al., 2011; Amiraslani and
ing (ICFRE, 2011) due to an increase in domestic demand Dragovich, 2013; De Jong et al., 2014). This shift in forest
(Indiastat, 2015). That said, this dependency on imports policies could result in a decline in timber production, thus
could prove to be detrimental as more and more log produ- creating a supply crunch for countries dependent on timber
cing and exporting countries worldwide shift their attention imports. In turn, countries like India (dependent on
from timber production to biodiversity conservation, due to imports) would be most affected, and therefore should
the recognition of the multiple benefits of forests with revise their existing policies and institutional frameworks
regard to ecosystem services. Similar changes in forest in an effort to increase timber production from TOFs and
management also have been observed across the globe, as other forest areas to meet growing domestic demand.
reflected in policies and regulations with a focus on biodi-
versity conservation (Cashore and Stone, 2012; Le et al.,
2012; Winkel, 2014; Raum and Potter, 2015). 3. Forest policies and acts in India
Over the past two decades, countries that export timber
to India have undergone policy changes with respect to 3.1. Colonial period (1857–1947)
timber extraction (Table 1). The Asian countries of Myan-
mar, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand have enforced a log During British rule, the Forest Department was a well-
export ban and Sustainable Forest Management Certifica- organized department, and forests were an important
tion Practices to control illegal logging and environmental source of revenue for the government (Guha and Gadgil,
degradation, and Indonesia has also signed a Voluntary 1989). The introduction of different forest policies and acts
Partnership Agreement on Forest Law Enforcement Gov- during colonial rule mostly aimed at the effective utiliza-
ernance and Trade to prevent the trading of illegal timber tion of Indian forests for enhancing the railway network
products (Guritno and Murao, 1999; Rahim and Shahwa- (to facilitate business) and military purposes, especially
hid, 2012; Heeswijk and Turnhout, 2013; ITTO, 2013; during the two world wars, as well as for earning greater
Miyamoto et al., 2014; Nurrochmat et al., 2014). The revenue by converting forest land into agricultural land
American countries of Brazil, USA, Ecuador and Costa (Shyamsunder and Parameswarappa, 1987; Mukerji,
Rica have enacted various policy regulations, including 2003).
reforestation subsidies and a log export ban on selected By the middle of the 19th century, the uncontrolled har-
timber species, with a view to protect natural forests from vest of forests for commercial and agricultural purposes
deforestation and degradation (Sierra, 2001; McGinley and generated concern on the part of the British administration
Cubbage, 2011; WRI and WBCSD, 2013). Some African regarding loss of valuable forest (Haeuber, 1993). Further-
countries, such as Ghana and Cameroon, have enacted laws more, to generate revenue through efficient utilization
and regulations, which include a log export ban, to ensure and scientific management of forests, the British formed
sustainable forest management and reduce forest the Imperial Forest Department in 1864, as well as
Table 2. Chronology of forest policies, acts and orders in India
Years Event Features
Pre-independence 1865 Forest Act of 1865 Generates revenue by selling timber and forest produce (GoI, 1865)
1878 Forest Act of 1878 Divides forests into reserve and protected forests; reserve forests meant for timber
production and ecological stability (GoI, 1878)
1894 Forest Policy of 1894 Facilitates conversion of forest lands for agriculture and timber logging (GoI, 1976)
1927 Forest Act of 1927 Controls timber and other forest products in transit, as well as the implementation
of fines and penalties related to forest offences; provides extensive powers to
state governments to formulate and implement forest laws (GoI, 1927)
Post-independence 1952 National Forest Policy (NFP) Complementary land use; management of forests for sustained production of timber
(GoI, 1976)
1972 Wildlife Protection Act (WPA) Constitutes protected areas where human occupation or resource exploitation would
be limited (GoI, 1972)
1976 National Commission on Maximizes forest products through the creation of forest corporations (GoI, 1976)
Agriculture (NCA)
1980 Forest Conservation Act (FCA) Governs the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes (GoI, 1980)
1988 National Forest Policy (NFP) Ensures environmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance (GoI, 1988)
1996 Hon. Supreme Court Order Bans harvesting in government forests without an approved working plan
(Rosencranz et al., 2007)
introduced new forest acts and policies during its rule communications through an expanding transport network,
(Table 2). The first Indian Forest Act (1865) promoted rev- which relied directly on timber (GoI, 1976; Balaji, 2002).
enue generation by emphasizing the sale of timber and for- Although the exorbitant demand for timber decreased after
est produce (GoI, 1865), which was replaced by The the Second World War, the domestic demand for forest
Forest Act of 1878 that classified forests into reserved, pro- products increased significantly due to an increase in popu-
tected and village, based on access and use (Haeuber, lation and urbanization, which simultaneously resulted in
1993; GoI, 1878). The act imposed restrictions on individ- substantial loss of forest lands. Forestry fell under the juris-
ual rights over forests and forest products from reserved diction of the Ministry of Agriculture, and was treated on
and protected forests. par with agriculture in terms of generating revenue and
The first national forest policy adopted by the British meeting the growing needs of the burgeoning population.
Colonial Government was introduced on 19 October 1894 During this era, the consumption of timber as quoted in
(GoI, 1976). The policy dealt with maintaining adequate first 5-year plan5 (1951–1956) was about 2.1 million tons
forest cover and enhancing revenue collection through the (GoI, 2012b). Similar to the colonial administration, the
extraction of valuable timber (Table 2). The Indian Forest independent Indian administration also viewed forests as a
Act (1927) replaced the Forest Act of 1878, and focused source of revenue, as well as a road to economic develop-
on the control of timber and other forest products in transit, ment (Haeuber, 1993).
as well as implemented fines and penalties related to forest The NFP of 1952, or the first forest policy post-inde-
offences (GoI, 1927). This new act gave extensive powers pendence, was enacted to provide an approach for balanced
to the central government to impose duties on timber and and complementary land use, and recommended a national
other forest products, and the state governments to formu- target of 33% forest cover for the total geographical area
late and implement forest laws. (Table 2). Although the NFP (1952) attempted to empha-
All of the forest acts and policies implemented during size the protective role of forests in the form of wildlife
the colonial period facilitated unregulated extraction of conservation, the improvement of soil fertility, watershed
timber in the name of revenue generation and military management, and the goal of bringing one-third of the
expansion for the then British Government. It was reported country under forest cover, no concerted efforts were made
that around 228,076 tonnes of timber were supplied from in this direction (GoI, 1976). In line with the new forest
Indian forests between April 1917 and October 1918, dur- policy, the subsequent 5-year plans in the 1960s and the
ing the First World War, and approximately 1.7 million 1970s promoted commercial schemes for the cultivation of
cubic feet of timber (mostly teak) was exported between fast growing species to address the increasing timber
1914 and 1919 by the British Government (Guha, 1983). demand (GoI, 2012b). The first to fourth 5-year plans
(1951–1956 to 1969–1974) in India emphasized economic
and efficient utilization of forest products, including
3.2. Forest policy post-independence (1947–1980)
Upon independence, India went through an infrastructural 5

Five years plans are centralized and integrated national economic
developmental phase in terms of industrial expansion. This programmes in India, implemented for periods of 5 years (Ministry of
expansion included river valley projects and improved Statistics and Programme Implementation, GoI).

inferior timber and wood residues (GoI, 2012b). Moreover,

the fourth 5-year plan (1969–1974) specifically stressed
the role of forestry in promoting the export of timber, as
well as import substitution strategies (GoI, 2012b).
Following this period, the increase in industrial round-
wood production grew steadily, and production of indus-
trial wood doubled from about 4.16 million m3 in
1955–1956 to about 8.93 million m3 in 1969–1970; how-
ever, demand reached 16 million m3 (Sharma, 1974). This
increasing gap in supply and demand led to the exploita-
tion of trees on farmlands and illegal logging from govern-
ment forests (GoI, 1976).
In 1976, the report of the National Commission on Agri-
culture (NCA) (GoI, 1976) suggested a revision of the
existing forest policy, as well as the formation of a new
policy, with a view to maximize forest productivity for
Figure 1. Area and number of protected areas (wildlife sanctuaries and
meeting the growing demand for industrial raw wood, tim- national parks) in India.
ber and other forest products for defence, communications Source: WII (2015).
and domestic needs. The recommendations of the NCA’s
report favoured production forestry over conservation for- and size of the protected area network increased consist-
estry through clear felling of valuable mixed forests, mixed ently (Figure 1), and presently consists of over 16.04 mil-
quality forests and inaccessible hardwood forests, as well lion ha, which is 4.88% of the total geographical area
as planting these areas with suitable fast growing species, (WII, 2015). Since the implementation of the WPA
yielding higher returns per unit area. It proposed the crea- between 1972 and 2015, the number of protected areas
tion of a forest corporation for harvesting forest products. increased sixfold, with an increase in area by about seven-
The functional classification of forests into protected, pro- fold (Figure 1).
ductive and social forests was also recommended In 1980, the Government of India (GoI) moved a step
(Kulkarni, 1987). The report further emphasized the con- ahead in its commitment to biodiversity conservation, and
cept of promoting social forestry programmes in order to enacted the Forest Conservation Act (FCA; 1980) that pro-
reduce the gap in timber supply and demand. A change in hibited state governments from allowing the use of forest
the administration of forests was witnessed in the same lands for any other purposes without prior approval from
year, and the subject of forests was transferred from the the central government (GoI, 1980). The FCA (1980),
state list to the concurrent list,6 bringing both the state and amended in 1988 and 2003, regulated the conversion/diver-
the central government together in administering control sion of any forest land to non-forest land (such as for the
over the forests. purpose of mining, roads, dams, industries, etc.), and
At the time when India was contemplating an increase in included a provision for compensatory afforestation, pref-
productivity of forests, the world was turning its attention erably in non-forest areas. Furthermore, from 1951 to
to biodiversity conservation. India was a growing economy 1980, about 4.33 million ha of forest was converted to
during that era but at the same time, it demonstrated its non-forest, bringing forest loss to about 150,000 ha per
commitment to the protection of the environment at the annum (Manoharan, 2011).
United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,
Stockholm, 1972 (UNEP, 2016). Conservation in India 3.3. Recent forest policy (1980–2010)
received further prominence with the implementation of
the Wildlife Protection Act (WPA) in 1972 (GoI, 1972). Although the recommendations of the NCA did not
Under the provisions of this act, protected areas were con- directly impact forest production, they did lead to the crea-
stituted where human occupation or resource exploitation tion of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) in
is limited (Figure 1). These areas consist of national parks, 1985, whose directive was to plan, promote, coordinate,
wildlife sanctuaries, conservation reserves, community and oversee the implementation of environmental and for-
reserves and marine protected areas, and the guidelines for estry policies (GoI, 2006). The Forest Survey of India was
their effective management have been amended from time also established in 1981 as per NCA recommendations,
to time (ELDF and WWF, 2009). Additionally, the number with a view to create a national forest survey organization
to facilitate a regular, periodic and comprehensive forest
6 resources survey in the country (FSI, 2015b).
The concurrent list is one of the three lists under the legislative
section of India along with union and state lists. Under this list, the India’s commitment to environmental and biodiversity
administering control lays with two parallel legislatures: union and state conservation received greater support from the NFP
(GoI, 2016). (1988), which initiated a paradigm shift in the forest
management approach from regulatory to participatory in accordance with the working plan of the area and as
(GoI, 1988). The recommendations made by the NCA for prepared by the State Government, which also had to be
increasing forest productivity to meet the increasing approved by the Central Government (Rosencranz et al.,
demand for timber were not heavily reflected in the new 2007). Further, the Hon. Supreme Court ordered all non-
forest policy. Through the protection and extension of for- forestry activities, such as sawmills and mining operations
ests, the NFP (1988) ensured the maintenance of environ- that had not received official permission from the Central
mental sustainability in the preservation and restoration of Government, to cease their operations, as well as
ecological balance and the conservation of natural heritage instructed the state governments to conduct a detailed
of the country. Forests were no longer only viewed in terms survey of the timber industry and measure the sustainabil-
of production, and a greater emphasis was placed on con- ity of forests with respect to the number of sawmills.
servation. The NFP (1988) encouraged afforestation and These legal prohibitions further adversely affected timber
the planting of TOFs. As per policy, the subsidized supply production in the country (Rosencranz et al., 2007;
of raw materials to wood industries ceased. It also encour- Rosencranz and Lele, 2008).
aged forest-based industries to procure raw materials in The court also completely banned tree felling in three
order to meet its requirements, and did so through the states and partially banned it in four states in northeastern
building of direct relationships with individuals who had India, along with a ban on the export of timber from
both the financial and technical capabilities to produce raw these states (Rosencranz et al., 2007). In turn, this
materials. The rights and concessions from forests were affected the livelihoods of tribal people of the region,
primarily oriented to meet the bona fide use of commu- where forestry was a chief source of income in all seven
nities living within and around forest areas, especially states (Nathan, 2000; Ramnath, 2002). In Meghalaya, the
tribal communities. Recognizing the need for people’s par- order imposed a blanket ban on all forestry activities in
ticipation in the NFP (1988), the government of India government as well as private forests (Nongbri, 2001). In
launched a people-oriented forest management programme, Arunachal Pradesh, the decline of forest revenue was
called the Joint Forest Management Programme, in 1990. reported to be about 84% due to the ban (Ramnath,
The programme initiated the involvement of village com- 2002). In addition to the impact on the livelihood of the
mittees, in conjunction with forest departments, for the local people, it also resulted in a shortage of timber pro-
protection, regeneration and development of degraded for- duction in the country (Nathan, 2000; Nongbri, 2001;
est lands. However, the programme demonstrated a mixed Ramnath, 2002; Rosencranz and Lele, 2008).
response due to inappropriate conflict resolution mechan- The transition of Indian forest policies, acts and regula-
isms, fragile institutional arrangements, inadequate people tions can be viewed as a shift from production to conser-
participation, inefficient accountability mechanisms, and vation, which is also advocated by the 1992 UNCED
poor collaboration between state forest departments and Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Following the Hon. Supreme
communities (Singh et al., 2005; Behera & Engel, 2006; Court Order (1996), the GoI launched two national pro-
Bhattacharya et al., 2010). grammes, namely, the National Forestry Action Pro-
Even though the WPA (1972), FCA (1980) and NFP gramme (1999) (GoI, 1999) and the National
(1988) changed the focus of Indian forestry from one of Afforestation Programme (2002) (GoI, 2002), with an
exploitation to one of protection, they were not able to aim to increase forest cover and to promote forest conser-
fully regulate forest logging nationwide. In order to restrict vation (Yasmi et al., 2010). Further, in 2004 the MoEF
further loss of forest areas due to illegal and uncontrolled called the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management
felling, the Hon. Supreme Court of India passed its first and Planning Authority (CAMPA) to manage the com-
order (interim order in Writ Petition No. 202, dated pensatory afforestation fund, to be used for forest regen-
12 December 1996) (Rosencranz et al., 2007), in response eration, management and protection, through the
to the writ petition filed by T. N. Godavarman in 1995, in collection of funds from user agencies (Das, 2010). In
which it interpreted the meaning of the word ‘forest’7 for 2006, the National Forest Commission’s report recom-
the implementation of the FCA (1980). Prior to this order, mended no requirement for amendment to the present for-
the term forest was not clearly defined and some states est policy, and emphasized conservation and management
misinterpreted it, and applied it only to reserve forests of forests on scientific principles in order to enhance its
(part of the RFAs, where timber extraction is prohibited) ecological contribution and productivity (GoI, 2006). All
instead of all forest areas. However, after the Hon. of these acts and programmes collectively reiterated that
Supreme Court’s order (1996), the act applied to all for- the primary role of Indian forests was to conserve biodi-
ests, regardless of ownership or legal status, and sus- versity and to maintain ecological sustainability over tim-
pended tree felling in the entire country. As per the first ber production, widening the gap in timber supply and
order, the felling of trees in forests was prohibited, except demand in India (Figure 2, Table 3). As per the GoI’s
data, this resulted in a huge decline in the production of
7
As per the Supreme Court order, the word ‘forest’ was to be inter- industrial roundwood from 24.4 million m3 in 1990, to
preted as per the dictionary meaning. 1.5 million m3 in 2000.
the ITTO, which states: “India has never provided reliable

production figures thus necessitating use of estimates
based on reported exports and assumed domestic con-
sumption” (ITTO, 2013: 8).
In the case of India, there is no centralized data pool that
maintains timber production records. Additionally, the Min-
istry of Statistics, GoI mentions the gap in the compilation
of forestry statistics in its report on agricultural and allied
sector statistics (GoI, 2013). Apart from the data on forest
cover that is assessed by the FSI, the data for production
and consumption of timber is not up-to-date. The inconsist-
ency in data collection and reporting necessitates urgent
intervention from the state and central governments, direct-
ing the concerned agencies/departments to collate such
information at the state and national levels. This will help in
guiding and formulating new policies/mechanisms for over-
coming the gap in supply and demand of timber in India.
Figure 2. Industrial roundwood production in India. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, data from industrial
Source: Indiastat (2015), ITTO (2015) and FAO (2016).
Notes: WPA 1972: Governs the constitution of protected areas where
roundwood production for all three sources has been quoted
human occupation or resource exploitation is limited. FCA 1980: separately in Figure 2, in order to analyse the discrepancies
Regulates the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes. NFP 1988: in data sourcing, as well as the need to centralize it.
Ensures environmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance. The FAO and the ITTO are primarily dependent on their
Hon. Supreme Court Ban 1996: Ban on green felling in RFAs without an corresponding country for data; however, India has been
approved working plan.
consistently lacking in the provision of reliable data. As a
result, data on timber production from the FAO and the
ITTO is mostly based on estimates made from assumed
4. Timber supply and demand consumption patterns, and therefore this could include tim-
ber production from all sources, including TOFs. Further-
4.1. Timber supply more, the similarity in the GoI’s production data between
1988 and 1995 is also based on FAO estimates, as quoted
The data on timber production in India has been sourced in Indiastat from 1988 to 1990. However, the data quoted
from three different places; the FAO, the ITTO and the by the GoI after 1996 is limited to the timber sourced from
GoI, and the data from each differs from the rest depending the RFAs. Thus, it is difficult to assign credibility to one
on the year (Figure 2). The data from the FAO and the particular source as compared to others, as enormous dis-
ITTO is similar between 2004 and 2011, whereas the data crepancies in the data exist. This also indicates that the gov-
from the FAO and the GoI is similar between 1988 and ernment should attempt to record data on timber production
1995. These inconsistencies and differences in data on from TOFs, so that comparisons with other sources can
industrial roundwood production reflect that the data on be made, and their related discrepancies can be addressed.
timber production in India is not consistent. Similar appre- Given this background, it is very difficult to engage in
hension is also mentioned in the biennial review report of dialogue and draw inferences about the impact of policy on
Table 3. Total projected demand of raw wood by different industries in India (in million m3)
Industry 1998* 1999* 2000* 2005* 2010* 2015† 2020†
Paper and paper board 4.48 4.48 4.48 8.96 15.4 26.24 35.84
Construction industry 13.6 14.6 15.9 19.4 22.1 26.3 28.5
Packaging 4.36 4.49 4.62 5.54 6.4 7.55 9
Furniture 2.25 2.38 2.52 3.36 4.62 5.9 7.53
Agricultural implements 2 2.06 2.12 2.33 2.5 2.5 2.5
Plywood 10.1 10.5 11 14 17.96 22.9 29.2
Others 15.12 16.04 17.08 20.32 25.91 31.37 40.23
Total 51.91 54.55 57.72 73.91 94.89 122.76 152.8
*Represents actual demand of timber.

†
Represents projected demand of timber.
Source: Indiastat (2015); the information for the actual demand of wood is available until 2010, and only the projected demand for 2015 and 2020 can be
found on the Government of India’s regulated site, indiastat.com, which provides secondary level socio-economic statistical information about India, its
states, regions and different sectors.

timber production in India. However, the decline in pro-

duction after the 1996 Hon. Supreme Court ban and a
gradual recovery in timber production since 2005–2006
are common trends observed in all three sources of data
(Figure 2). In order to understand the implications of the
different policies, the discussion about timber production
can be divided by pre and post Hon. Supreme Court Order
(1996). The data on timber production between 1988 and
1995 from the GoI and the FAO is similar, and subse-
quently one may infer with some degree of certainty that
the WPA (1972), the FCA (1980) and the NFP (1988),
which were drafted to shift the focus of forest management
from timber production to conservation, provided no evi-
dence of having impacted the regulation of timber extrac-
tion in India (Figure 2). The GoI provides no data on
industrial roundwood production between 2000 and 2005;
however, there is a positive trend of recovery in timber pro-
duction (1.58–3 million m3). Moreover, the values of tim- Figure 3. Roundwood import from 1963 to 2011 in India.
ber production from GoI sources are different from those Source: ICFRE (2011) and FAO (2016).
Notes: WPA 1972: Governs the constitution of protected areas where
of the FAO and the ITTO because of a difference in meth- human occupation or resource exploitation is limited. FCA 1980:
odology of data sourcing, as discussed above. Such Regulates the diversion of forest l and for non-forest purposes. NFP 1988:
observed inconsistencies and discrepancies in government Ensures environmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance.
records concerning timber production limit the scope of Hon. Supreme Court Ban 1996: Ban on green felling in RFAs without an
establishing the causality between policy and timber pro- approved working plan.
duction. It is therefore suggested that there is a need for
the effective monitoring of the implementation of any poli- have been steadily rising since then (Figure 3). It was
cies and/or acts through verifiable records. reported that there had been an increase of about 60% in
The decline in timber production from government for- imports value and 65% in imports quantity of timber
ests has been attributed to the growing emphasis on forest between 1997 and 1998 (Bansal, 2004). In the last
conservation (ICFRE, 2010) through policies, acts and reg- 20 years, the import of industrial wood volumes has grown
ulations; however, this can be ascertained only when there sevenfold (Figure 3), whereas the export during the same
is a robust record keeping of timber production from all period is abysmally low, and there is no particular trend
sources within the country. The conversion of more and observed (Figures 3 and 4). Currently, the import of round-
more forest land to protected areas for conservation could wood amounts to nearly Rs. 76.88 billion8 in 2009 to 2010
be corroborating evidence for the decline in timber produc- (Figure 3) (ICFRE, 2011). Most timber imports are in the
tion, as timber extraction is completely banned in the pro- form of logs, whereas the import of sawnwood is in lesser
tected areas (Figure 1). Moreover, the Hon Supreme Court quantities, and veneer and plywood is almost negligible
Order (1996), which paved the path to sustainable timber (Pandey and Rangaraju, 2008).
production through approved working plans, was not The large scale import of timber affects the domestic pri-
actively taken up by the states for timber logging cing pattern of timber (GoI, 2006), and therefore the import-
(Rosencranz et al., 2007). Further, the complete ban in the export policy (EXIM) of the country should be reviewed to
northeastern states of India, initially a hub of timber and rectify the pricing in the market, so that it is economically
plywood, led to the cessation of all its forest activities, viable to grow trees on farmlands. Timber trade is not regu-
resulting in a gap in timber supply. Even today, these states lated in India; thus, there is no fixed domestic pricing pat-
have a low number of approved working plans. The state tern for timber available in the country. Generally, the
of Assam currently has a working plan for six of its 28 for- auctions held by the Forest Department report an annual
est divisions (GoA, 2016), and India has 535 valid working increase in the minimum price (Indiastat, 2015).
plans out of 781 territorial divisions (ICFRE, 2011).
4.3. Timber demand
4.2. Timber imports and exports
The demand for wood continued to increase during this
The sudden dip in domestic timber production following period due to an increase in population and a growing
the Hon. Supreme Court Order (1996), coupled with a demand for timber products, resulting from the revival of
growing domestic demand for timber, occurred in the same
year as the GoI liberalized its import policy of wood and 8
Approximately US$ 1.2 billion (exchange rate: US$ 1 = 61.83 INR as
wood products (ICFRE, 2010). As a result, wood imports of 2 February 2015).

increase in imports (Figures 2 and 3). Being one of the top

10 countries in private plantations in the world (Lal, 2000;
Carle et al., 2002; FSC, 2012), India has the potential to
increase production from farm forestry, private plantations
and community forestry through private–public partner-
ships, in order to meet domestic timber demand (Pandey,
2008). This is evident from the fact that wood-based paper
mills, one of the fastest growing sectors in terms of
demand, get 80% of their wood from agro farm forestry
sources. Furthermore, the Indian paper industry has planted
and funded about 657,093 ha plantations on farmlands
over the past two decades, which produce 39.42 million
tonnes of wood (Kulkarni, 2013). The potential to enhance
timber production through TOFs is also recognised by the
Figure 4. Roundwood export from 1963 to 2011 in India. GoI, as mentioned in the National Forest Commission
Source: FAO (2016). Report 2006 (GoI, 2006). The Ministry of Environment,
Notes: WPA 1972: Governs the constitution of protected areas where Forests, and Climate Change (MoEF&CC9) also stressed
human occupation or resource exploitation is limited. FCA 1980:
the need for TOF management in the recent National
Regulates the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes. NFP 1988:
Ensures environmental stability and maintenance of ecological balance. Working Plan Code 201410 (GoI, 2014a). The National
Hon. Supreme Court Ban 1996: Ban on green felling in RFAs without an Agroforestry Policy (2014) is another national initiative by
approved working plan. the GoI that recognizes agroforestry as an important source
of timber, as well as emphasizes the need to simplify regu-
the domestic economy and the rapid expansion of middle lations related to the felling and transit of tree species
and upper income groups (ITTO, 2003). Such demand is (GoI, 2014b).
likely to further continue to increase with the population The FSI (2011) reports on timber production from RFAs
and per capita GDP, as also observed by Kayo et al. and potential timber production from TOFs. Since estimat-
(2015), for OECD (Organisation for Economic Co.- ing actual timber production from TOFs is difficult due to
operation and Development) and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, different sets of felling and transit rules in different states
India, China and South Africa) countries, until the econ- and poor record keeping, the FSI uses an alternative
omy reaches saturation. The demand for raw wood by approach to estimate the potential timber production from
different industries increased from 52 million m3 in 1998 TOFs. Under this approach, species of TOFs are classified
to 95 million m3 in 2010, and is projected to increase fur- into two groups (timber and non-timber) for each state.
ther to 123 million m3 in 2015 and 153 million m3 in 2020 The timber species are further reclassified into three groups
(Table 3). This demand is found to be doubling or tripling based on their rotation period: short, medium and long.
in all sectors except for agriculture, where demand is stag- The annual potential production is finally estimated using
nant because of increased mechanisation. The increase in the Von Mantel formula11 (FSI, 2013).
demand for paper and the paper board industry has It is interesting to observe that in spite of a significantly
increased the most since 1998. Similarly, the demand for higher area of government RFAs as compared to TOFs, the
raw wood in the construction, packaging, plywood and fur- potential timber production from TOFs is much higher
niture industries is consistently growing (1998–2010), and than that from government RFAs (Table 5). The low timber
is projected to increase further due to economic growth and production from RFAs could be attributed to various rea-
a rise in population. Moreover, it is interesting to mention sons, such as a lower number of approved working plans,
that timber production from government forest areas caters fewer areas with the potential for timber logging, and an
to 3.35% of the total demand, whereas potential timber pro- increase in protected areas, as more emphasis was placed
duction from TOFs fulfils 45% of the total demand (FSI, on the role of the forest in biodiversity conservation and
2011). This implies that there is a need for enhanced timber maintaining ecological balance. However, it may not be
production from RFAs and TOFs on a sustainable basis, or
through enabling policies and programmes to meet domes- 9
In the latest move by the GoI on 28 May 2014, the ministry has been
tic demand and reduce the reliance of India on imports. renamed the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
(MoEF&CC).
10
4.4. Role of TOFs in timber supply National Working Plan Code 2014 is a uniform code for the sustaina-
ble management of forests and biodiversity in India. From now on, the
preparation of division working plans will be made as per the provisions
Trees outside forests (TOFs) became more important after
of this code (GoI, 2014a).
the Hon. Supreme Court Order (1996) took effect, which 11
The Von Mantel formula for yield determination provides a general
regulated logging in government forests, and resulted in a indication of forest yield using the volume of growing stock and rotation
sharp decline of timber production and a simultaneous cycle (FAO, 1998).

appropriate to compare and attribute the difference in tim- Table 4. Growing stock per unit area of TOFs and RFAs for selected
ber production between RFAs and TOFs to policy implica- states
tion because of the unavailability of uniform and Growing stock (m3 per ha) TOFs RFAs
comprehensive data from both sources. Nevertheless, for
the purpose of discussion, we have tried to ascertain the Chhattisgarh 46.15 58.07
reasons for lower timber production from RFAs, as well as Gujarat 83.75 23.38
Jharkhand 41.07 43.94
compared them with TOFs, by taking the value of the
Karnataka 46.83 76.96
growing stock of TOFs as a proxy for potential timber Kerala 32.65 134.64
production. Madhya Pradesh 45.25 26.51
Trees outside forests (TOFs) contribute one-fourth of Rajasthan 50.86 10.41
the total growing stock of the country, and have become a Tamil Nadu 46.08 50.72
Uttarakhand 23.30 124.49
major source of timber in India. In the most recent State of
Forest Report, the FSI published data on forest cover inside Source: Calculated from FSI (2015a) data on forest cover inside RFAs.
the RFAs of few states for the first time12 (FSI, 2015a).
Using this information, along with the data on forest cover
and tree cover, the tentative area of TOFs has been reporting of forest cover shows that in spite of all the
assessed for these states, and further used in the calculation conservation-oriented policies and acts in play, Indian for-
of growing stock per unit area (Table 4). It has been found ests have not shown any considerable improvement in
that states like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan either growing stock or forest cover over the years. Further,
showed a higher growing stock per unit area for TOFs it also raises concerns about the present management prac-
compared to RFAs. Although no official record for the area tices being implemented in the RFAs. Management prac-
under TOFs is available for all states, it may be the case tices here refer to the effective implementation of the NFP
that the growing stock per ha in many other states could be (1988) to manage forests on a sustainable basis for primary
higher for TOFs as compared to RFAs. timber products, among other things (GoI, 2012c). In all
The lower growing stock per ha of RFAs implies that these years, there has not been any additional forest biodi-
there is immense potential to increase growing stocks in versity and productivity, nor has there been any increase in
RFAs through scientific management practices in the form timber production (Puyravaud et al., 2010).
of innovative silvicultural practices, eco-restoration of Even in states with a high forest growing stock, such as
degraded forest landscapes, improved biomass productiv- Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Jammu and Kashmir, Jhar-
ity, etc., whereas the higher growing stock per ha of TOFs khand, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, timber production from
in a few states indicates good management practices on the government forests is very low. On the other hand, states
part of the states, in the form of enabling policies for grow- with a comparatively low forest growing stock, such as
ing trees for commercial benefits to the growers (Tables 4 Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal, fair well in terms of
and 5). Moreover, RFAs have been subjected to overex- timber production from forests (Table 5). This discrepancy
ploitation, illegal removal of timber, unregulated grazing, can be attributed to the lower number of approved working
fire hazards and other anthropogenic pressures in order to plans in the region and lack of forest field staff that directly
preserve the livelihoods of forest dwellers, causing degra- affects forest utilization (World Bank, 2006). For example,
dation and lowering productivity and production (Davidar the state of Assam currently has six approved working
et al., 2010; Puyravaud et al., 2010; Ghosh et al., 2015). plans out of 28 forest divisions (GoA, 2016), and India has
Assessment of the growing stock of RFAs at the national 535 valid working plans out of 781 territorial divisions,
level was initiated by the FSI, and first published in its state which means that no tree felling can be undertaken in the
of forest report in 2003. In the latest State of Forest Report remaining territorial divisions (ICFRE, 2011). While it is
by the FSI (2015a), the growing stock of RFAs is about important to mention that not all territorial divisions have
4195 million m3, having decreased by 12% since its first the potential for timber production, it is also the case that
reporting in 2003 (FSI, 2011; 2015a). A recent study by without an approved working plan, tree felling from any
Ravindranath et al. (2014) has further criticised the asses- forest divisions is not permissible.
sing and reporting of forest cover by the FSI, and con- In this regard, operationalization of the REDD+
cluded that India could potentially be over-reporting forest (Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degra-
cover under the current monitoring and reporting approach. dation and the role of conservation, sustainable manage-
This decline in the growing stock and the potential over- ment of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in
developing countries) framework will hold governmental
12
Due to the non-availability of digitized forest boundaries for the entire forest departments more accountable in terms of monitor-
country, the forest cover within the RFA, under the control of state forest ing and reporting on the rate of afforestation and deforesta-
departments (SFDs), was not possible to monitor and assess. At present, tion, as well as with changes in carbon stock, based on
12 SFDs have provided usable digitized boundaries for the RFA to the detailed guidelines (Ravindranath et al., 2014). This will
FSI, thus making it possible to assess forest cover within the RFA.

Table 5. Forest cover and RFAs, growing stock, and estimated wood production in RFAs and TOFs in different states and union territories in India
Forest Recorded Forest Growing stock Estimated production Growing stock Potential production
cover† in Areas (RFAs)* of RFAs in of wood from RFAs of TOFs‡ in of wood from TOFs
States km2 (2013) in km2 (2013) million m3 (2013) in million m3 (2011) million m3 (2013) in million m3 (2011)
Andhra Pradesh 46,116 63,814 195.83 0.14 102.15 1.94

Arunachal Pradesh 67,321 51,541 439.51 0.06 87.94 0.76
Assam 27,671 26,832 151.90 0.03 38.09 1.36
Bihar 7,291 6,473 29.33 0.01 41.66 1.21
Chhattisgarh 55,621 59,772 347.11 0.40 76.31 1.83
Delhi 179.81 85 0.47 NA 1.05 NA
Goa 2,219 1,225 10.33 NA 3.91 0.02
Gujarat 14,653 21,647 50.62 0.10 109.01 3.10
Haryana 1,586 1,559 5.39 0.11 14.19 1.98
Himachal Pradesh 14,683 37,033 317.30 0.23 20.76 0.94
Jammu and Kashmir 22,538 20,230 232.18 0.06 145.06 0.83
Jharkhand 23,473 20,605 103.73 0.01 55.95 1.33
Karnataka 36,132 38,284 294.63 0.05 89.53 2.02
Kerala 17,922 11,309 152.27 0.07 45.79 1.63
Madhya Pradesh 77,522 94,689 251.00 0.40 82.98 3.17
Maharashtra 50,632 61,357 208.50 0.20 139.70 3.52
Manipur 16,990 17,418 50.29 NA 9.37 0.22
Meghalaya 17,288 94,96 39.88 NA 20.04 0.29
Mizoram 19,054 16,717 59.36 NA 8.17 0.42
Nagaland 13,044 9,222 37.08 NA 11.89 0.34
Odisha 50,347 58,136 235.77 0.03 74.49 1.42
Punjab 1,772 3,084 13.02 0.09 17.06 2.65
Rajasthan 16,086 32,737 34.09 0.06 79.17 3.46
Sikkim 3,358 5,841 23.84 NA 2.42 0.03
Tamil Nadu 23,844 22,877 116.04 0.01 62.14 0.83
Tripura 7,866 6,294 22.90 NA 6.87 0.26
Uttar Pradesh 14,349 16,583 134.51 0.43 76.11 5.08
Uttarakhand 24,508 34,651 473.08 0.25 19.34 0.70
West Bengal 16,805 11,879 83.31 0.32 41.74 1.44
A & N Islands 6,711 7,171 57.95 NA 0.55 0.01
Chandigarh 17.26 35 0.26 NA 0.08 NA
Dadra & Nagar Haveli 213 204 1.81 NA 0.72 0.01
Daman & Diu 9.27 8 0.00 NA 0.10 NA
Lakshadweep 27.06 0 0.00 NA 0.05 NA
Puducherry 50.06 13 0.08 NA 0.29 0.01
Total 697,898 771,821 4173.36 3.18 1484.68 42.77
*Recorded Forest Areas (RFAs) are areas recorded as forests in government records (FSI, 2013).
†
Forest cover is defined as all land, 1 ha or more in area, with a tree canopy density of 10% or more, irrespective of ownership or legal status. Such land
may not necessarily be a RFA (FSI, 2013).
‡
Trees Outside Forests (TOFs) are the trees growing outside RFAs (FSI, 2013).
Source: FSI (2011,2013).
not only help in monitoring the accountability of forest Bengal, Jammu and Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh in
departments with regard to sustainable forest management, spite of their higher growing stock of TOFs, due to simpli-
but also help in exploring the scope of monetary incentives fied rules for the harvesting and transit of farm-grown spe-
for enhancing the carbon stock through the cultivation of cies, as well as market forces (Table 5). This implies that
trees on farmlands. there is the potential to increase timber production from
Even though potential timber production from TOFs is TOFs through a uniform national level policy.
significantly higher as compared to RFAs at the national Currently, only the timber produced from RFAs is being
level, there is significant variation among states in terms of reported nationally, whereas the potential timber produc-
timber production from TOFs. This is due to a difference tion from TOFs was reported for the first time in the State
in policies related to the harvest and transit of TOFs spe- of Forest Report, 2011, and has not been updated since
cies (GoI, 2012a). As a result, even though the states of then. A state-wide detailed assessment of timber produced
Punjab and Haryana have a lower growing stock of TOFs, outside RFAs can help in understanding the impact of state
they have a greater potential for timber production from policies on the production of timber, which will provide
said TOFs as compared to states such as Odisha, West further insights into the design, modification, or revision of
existing policies, in order to increase timber production the training of forest officials in preparing the working plan
from TOFs. Apart from meeting timber demand, TOFs should be imparted, and northeastern states should be
also have a significant role to play in the revival of the rural given greater priority; and (3) each state should notify and
economy (GoI, 2014a). Additionally, the promotion of demarcate 10% of the RFA for improving forest productiv-
TOFs should be linked to incentive-based carbon seques- ity by raising high-quality plantations, which in turn should
tration, which in turn will also act in the mitigation and be strictly monitored. The need for valid record and con-
adaptation of measures related to climate change. sistent data keeping with respect to timber production is
also important for effectively monitoring the implementa-
tion of any policies or acts. Additionally, the GoI should
5. Conclusion mandate state forest departments to report progress on each
of the three functional objectives (conservation, restoration
As forest guidelines shifted more toward conservation and and production) through standard indicators. This will also
sustainability and further from commerce, timber produc- help in developing a comprehensive framework for moni-
tion from government forests went into sharp decline as toring and reporting on the productivity of government
imports simultaneously increased. Although sustainable managed forests and TOFs. In this regard, the operationali-
resource use is necessary, growing demand for timber and zation of the REDD+ framework would not only hold the
increasing imports must be addressed by policymakers. government forest departments more accountable, but
Forests should be maintained according to the principles of would also help in benefiting from additional international
sustainable forest management, with the aim of meeting finance as a mitigation measure to climate change.
social, economic, ecological, cultural and spiritual func- The policies related to TOFs, which include farm forestry,
tions, as well as enhancing biodiversity. Sustainable forest private plantations and social forestry, should also be
management based on forest certification could be a step in revised, with the aim to bridge the gap in supply and
this direction. This understanding should play an integral demand of timber. A synchronized nationwide policy or
role in the review of current forest policies and acts, in an guideline could be developed, seeking insights from the
effort to realize the complete potential of the forestry sector leading states in TOFs (Haryana, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh,
in Indian economic development. Uttar Pradesh) for market and industrial linkages. In the
In light of the changing objectives of policies and regu- recent National Working Plan Code (2014), the MoEF&CC,
lations related to forests and TOFs that impact timber pro- GoI also has stressed the need for off-forest tree manage-
duction, it is suggested that upcoming Indian forest policy ment. Further, there is a lack of reliability and consistency
should have defined objectives based on the specific func- in some of the available data and information dealing with
tions of forests, namely restoration, conservation and pro- the growing stock, consumption and production of timber,
duction. Conservation policy should focus on maintaining which constrains the forecast of supply and demand projec-
ecological balance and improving biodiversity through a tions. Strengthening and building capacities of the organiza-
holistic approach of protected area management. The effec- tions and officials related to the monitoring and evaluation
tiveness of policy-guiding conservation should be reviewed of forests and TOFs with respect to productivity is another
based on the periodic monitoring of biodiversity richness key concern that the government needs to address.
in these areas, instead of only focusing on converting more
areas to sanctuaries and national parks. Similarly, restora-
tion policy should be targeted at the reclamation, rehabili-
tation and regeneration of degraded landscapes and Acknowledgements
wastelands, depending on the severity of degradation.
The restoration policy and its corresponding programme The authors would like to thank the director, IIFM for pro-
should lead to time-bound action plans for the rehabilita- viding the necessary support and infrastructure required for
tion of degraded areas. The fund for restoration is already the study. The authors also take this opportunity to sin-
being utilized under CAMPA, and this can be strengthened cerely acknowledge the valuable comments and sugges-
further by regularly monitoring and evaluating it. Besides, tions of the anonymous reviewers and the journal’s editorial
restoration of the degraded landscapes can be further accel- office, which have tremendously helped in improving the
erated through leveraging funds from other similar govern- manuscript.
ment programmes that have provisions for plantations.
Production forestry should focus on a sustainable
increase in forest productivity (timber production) from References
RFAs and TOFs. For increased timber production from
Alemagi, D., Kozak, R., 2010. Illegal logging in Cameroon: Causes and
RFAs, the specific recommendations are: (1) each state
the path forward. Forest Policy and Economics, 12(8): 554–561.
should get their working plan approved and updated so that Amiraslani, F., Dragovich, D., 2013. Forest management policies and oil
felling based on the approved working plan can be under- wealth in Iran over the last century: A review. Natural Resources
taken in the RFA; (2) as per the latest working plan code, Forum, 37(3): 167–176.

Amoah, M., Becker, G., Nutto, L., 2009. Effects of log export ban policy Ghosh, N., Mukhopadhyay, P., Shah, A., Panda, M., 2015. Nature, Econ-
and dynamics of global tropical wood markets on the growth of timber omy and Society. Springer, New Delhi.
industry in Ghana. Journal of Forest Economics, 15(3): 167–185. GoI (Government of India), 1865. Indian Forest Act 1865. Available at
Balaji, S., 2002. Forest policy in India – in retrospect and prospect. Paper http://lawmin.nic.in/legislative/textofcentralacts/1865.pdf (accessed
presented at the IUFRO Science/Policy Interface Task Force regional 21 March 2016).
meeting held in Chennai, India at the M.S. Swaminathan Research GoI (Government of India), 1878. Indian Forest Act 1878. Available at
Foundation, 16–19 July, 2002. http://lawmin.nic.in/legislative/textofcentralacts/1878.pdf (accessed
Bansal, A.K., 2004. Indian timber imports – an analysis. Indian Forester, 21 March 2016).
130(9): 963–976. GoI (Government of India), 1927. Indian Forest Act 1927. Available at
Behera, B., Engel, S., 2006. Institutional analysis of evolution of joint for- http://lawmin.nic.in/legislative/textofcentralacts/1927.pdf (accessed
est management in India: A new institutional economics approach. 21 March 2016).
Forest Policy and Economics, 8(4): 350–362. GoI (Government of India), 1972. Wildlife Protection Act 1972. Available
Bhattacharya, P., Pradhan, L., Yadav, G., 2010. Joint forest management at http://www.moef.nic.in/legis/wildlife/wildlife1c1.pdf (accessed
in India: Experience of two decades. Resources, Conservation and 21 March 2016).
Recycling, 54(8): 469–480. GoI (Government of India), 1976. Report of the National Commission on
Carle, J., Vuorinen, P., Del Lungo, A., 2002. Status and trends in global Agriculture, Part IX, Forestry. National Commission on Agriculture,
forest plantation development. Forest Products Journal, 52(7/8): 12–23. Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, Government of India,
Cashore, B., Stone, M.W., 2012. Can legality verification rescue global New Delhi, India.
forest governance? Analyzing the potential of public and private pol- GoI (Government of India), 1980. Forest Conservation Act 1980. Availa-
icy intersection to ameliorate forest challenges in Southeast Asia. For- ble at http://www.moef.nic.in/sites/default/files/Forest.pdf (accessed
est Policy and Economics, 18(1): 13–22. 21 March 2016).
Dadebo, M.A., Shinohara, T., 1999. Forest resources and timber produc- GoI (Government of India), 1988. National Forest Policy 1988. Available
tion of Ghana: Current instruments for sustainable development. Jour- at http://www.moef.gov.in/sites/default/files/introduction–nfp.pdf
nal of Forest Research, 4(1): 1–12. (accessed 26 March 2016).
Das, S., 2010. The strange valuation of forests in India. Economic and GoI (Government of India), 1999. National Forestry Action Programme
Political Weekly, 45(9): 16–18. 1999. Available at http://www.moef.nic.in/report/9900/chap03.
Davidar, P., Sahoo, S., Mammen, P., Acharya, P., Puyravaud, J., html#natforact (accessed 21 March 2016).
Arjunan, M., Garrigues, J., Roessingh, K., 2010. Assesing the extent GoI (Government of India), 2002. National Afforestation Programme
and causes of forest degradation in India: Where do we stand? Biologi- 2002. Available at http://naeb.nic.in/documents/NAP_intro.htm
cal Conservation, 143(12): 2937–2944. (accessed 21 March 2016).
De Jong, W., Cano, W., Zenteno, M., Soriano, M., 2014. The legally GoI (Government of India), 2006. Report of the National Forest Commis-
allowable versus the informally practicable in Bolivia’s domestic tim- sion. Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India. Avail-
ber market. Forest Policy and Economics, 48(1): 46–54. able at http://wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/biodiversity/sahyadri_enews/
Diete, T., Ferguson, I., MacLaren, D., 2005. Log export restrictions and newsletter/issue27/pdfs/1–8_forest%20commission.pdf (accessed
trade policies in the Philippines: Bane or blessing to sustainable forest 24 January 2016).
management? Forest Policy and Economics, 7(2): 187–198. GoI (Government of India), 2012a. Report on the Regulatory Regime
ELDF (Enviro Legal Defence Firm), WWF (World Wildlife Fund), 2009. Regarding Felling and Transit Regulations for Tree Species Grown on
Conserving Protected Areas and Wildlife: A Judicial Journey. Enviro Non Forest and Private Lands. Ministry of Environment & Forests,
Legal Defence Firm, World Wildlife Fund, New Delhi. Government of India, New Delhi, India.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 1998. Guidelines for the Man- GoI (Government of India), 2012b. Five–year plans, planning commis-
agement of Tropical Forests 1, The Production of Wood. FAO Forestry sion. Available at http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/planrel/
Paper 135. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. fiveyr/welcome.html (accessed 21 March 2016).
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2010. Global Forest Resource GoI (Government of India), 2012c. Indian Forest Service. Available at
Assessment. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. http://www.ifs.nic.in/ (accessed 19 February 2016).
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2013. Towards the Assessment GoI (Government of India), 2013. Report of the Committee on Statistics
of Trees Outside Forests. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. of Agriculture and Allied Sectors. National Statistical Commission,
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2014. Terminology. Available Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of
at http://www.fao.org/faoterm/en/ (accessed 02 May 2014). India, New Delhi, India.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2016. Forests products statis- GoI (Government of India), 2014a. National Working Plan Code – 2014
tics. Available at http://www.fao.org/forestry/statistics/80570/en/ (For Sustainable Management of Forests and Biodiversity in India).
(accessed 02 May 2014). Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India, New Delhi,
FSC (Forest Stewardship Council), 2012. Strategic Review on the Future India.
of Forest Plantations. Forest Stewardship Council, Helsinki, Finland. GoI (Government of India), 2014b. National Agroforestry Policy. Ministry
FSI (Forest Survey of India), 2001. India State of Forest Report. Forest of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi, India.
Survey of India, Dehradun. GoI (Government of India), 2016. Concurrent powers of legislation.
FSI (Forest Survey of India), 2011. India State of Forest Report. Forest Available at http://lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/finalreport/v2b3–3.htm
Survey of India, Dehradun. (accessed 30 April, 2016).
FSI (Forest Survey of India), 2013. India State of Forest Report. Forest GoA (Government of Assam), 2016. Working plan of Assam Forest
Survey of India, Dehradun. Department. Available at http://assamforest.in/general%20forestry/
FSI (Forest Survey of India), 2015a. India State of Forest Report. Forest working_plan.php (accessed 13 January, 2016).
Survey of India, Dehradun. Guha, R., 1983. Forestry in British and Post-British India: A historical
FSI (Forest Survey of India), 2015b. Brief history of Forest Survey of analysis. Economic and Political Weekly, 18(44): 1882–1896.
India. Available at http://fsi.nic.in/details.php?pgID=sb_1 (accessed Guha, R., Gadgil, M., 1989. State forestry and social conflict in British
25 March 2016). India. Past & Present, 123: 141–177.
Gautam, A.P., Shivakoti, G.P., Webb, E.L., 2004. A review of forest poli- Guritno, A.D., Murao, K., 1999. The observation of log export banning
cies, institutions and changes in the resource condition in Nepal. Inter- policy in Indonesia: Conditions, problems and alternative solutions.
national Forestry Review, 6(2): 136–148. Journal of Forest Research, 4(2): 79–85.

Haeuber, R., 1993. Indian Forest Policy in two eras: Continuity or Nongbri, T., 2001. Timber ban in North-East India: Effects on livelihood
change? Environmental History Review, 17(1): 49–76. and gender. Economic and Political Weekly, 36(21): 1893–1900.
Heeswijk, L., Turnhout, E., 2013. The discursive structure of FLEGT Nurrochmat, D.R., Dharmawan, A.H., Obidzinski, K., Dermawan, A.,
(Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade): The negotiation Erbaugh, J.T., 2014. Contesting National and International Forest
and interpretation of legality in the EU and Indonesia. Forest Policy Regimes: Case of Timber Legality Certification for Community Forests
and Economics, 32(1): 6–13. in Central Java, Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 68: 54–64.
ICFRE (Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education), 2010. Forest Pacheco, P., Jong, W., Johnson, J., 2010. The evolution of the timber sec-
Sector Report India 2010. Indian Council of Forestry Research and tor in lowland Bolivia: Examining the influence of three disparate pol-
Education, Dehradun. icy approaches. Forest Policy and Economics, 12(4): 271–276.
ICFRE (Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education), 2011. For- Pandey, C.N., Rangaraju, T.S., 2008. India’s industrial wood balance.
estry Statistics India. Indian Council of Forestry Research and Educa- International Forest Review, 10(2): 173–189.
tion, Dehradun. Available at http://www.icfre.org/UserFiles/File/ Pandey, D., 2008. Trees outside the forest (TOF) resources in India. Inter-
Institute–ICFRE/2013/Stat/Forestry–stat–07Mar13.htm (accessed national Forest Review, 10(2): 125–133.
2 May 2014). Petersen, L., Sandhovel, A., 2001. Forest policy reform and the role of
Indiastat, 2015. Industrial roundwood production. Available at http:// incentives in Tanzania. Forest Policy and Economics, 2(1): 39–55.
www.indiastat.com/forestandwildlife/13/forestproduce/17875/stats. Puyravaud, J., Davidar, P., Laurence, W., 2010. Cryptic destruction of
aspx (accessed 2 May 2014). India’s native forests. Conservation Letters, 3(6): 390–394.
ITTO (International Tropical Timber Organization), 2003. Indian Timber Rahim, A.S.A., Shahwahid, H.O.M., 2012. Sustainable forest manage-
Market Emerges as Prospect and Challenge for Tropical Timber Sec- ment policy and the analysis of convergence effects on timber produc-
tor. International Tropical Timber Organization, Yokohama. tion. Forest Policy and Economics, 22(1): 60–64.
ITTO (International Tropical Timber Oraganization), 2013. Biennial Ramnath, M., 2002. Impact of ban on timber felling. Economic and Politi-
Review and Assessment of the World Timber Situation. International cal Weekly, 37(48): 4774–4776.
Tropical Timber Organization, Yokohama. Raum, S., Potter, C., 2015. Forestry paradigms and policy change: The
ITTO (International Tropical Timber Organization), 2014. ITTO member evolution of forestry policy in Britain in relation to the ecosystem
countries. Available at http://www.itto.int/itto_members/ (accessed approach. Land Use Policy, 49: 462–470.
5 January 2016). Ravindranath, N.H., Murthy, I.K., Priya, J., Upgupta, S., Mehra, S.,
ITTO (International Tropical Timber Oraganization), 2015. ITTO statis- Nalin, S., 2014. Forest area estimation and reporting: Implications for
tics. Available at http://www.itto.int/annual_review_output/ (accessed conservation, management and REDD+. Current Science, 106(9):
2 May 2014). 1201–1206.
Joshi, A.K., Pant, P., Kumar, P., Giriraj, A., Joshi, P.K., 2011. National Redo, D., Millington, A.C., Hindery, D., 2011. Deforestation dynamics
forest policy in India: Critique of targets and implementation. Small and policy changes in Bolivia’s post–neoliberal era. Land Use Policy,
Scale Forestry, 10(1): 83–96. 28(1): 227–241.
Kayo, C., Oka, H., Hashimoto, S., Mizukami, M., Takagi, S., 2015. Soci- Rosencranz, A., Boenig, E., Dutta, B., 2007. The Godavarman case: The
oeconomic development and wood consumption. Journal of Forest Indian Supreme Court’s breach of constitutional boundaries in manag-
Research, 20(3): 309–320. ing India’s forests. Environmental Law Reporter, News and Analysis,
Kleinn, C., 2000. On large area inventory and assessment of trees outside 37(1): 10032–10042.
forests. Unasylva, 200(51): 3–10. Rosencranz, A., Lele, S., 2008. Supreme Court and India’s forests. Eco-
Kotilainen, J., Rytteri, T., 2011. Transformation of forest policy regimes nomic and Political Weekly, 43(1): 11–14.
in Finland since the 19th century. Journal of Historical Geography, Sharma, L.C., 1974. A pattern for forest industry in India. The Common-
37(4): 429–439. wealth Forestry Review, 53(2): 146–153.
Kulkarni, H.D., 2013. Pulp and paper industry raw material scenario – Shyamsunder, S., Parameswarappa, S., 1987. Forestry in India: The fores-
ITC plantation a case study. IIPTA, 25(1): 79–89. ter’s view. Ambio, 16(6): 332–337.
Kulkarni, S., 1987. Forest legislation and tribals: Comments on forest Sierra, R., 2001. The role of domestic timber markets in tropical deforest-
policy resolution. Economic and Political Weekly, 22(50): ation and forest degradation in Ecuador: Implications for conservation,
2143–2148. planning and policy. Ecological Economics, 36(2): 327–340.
Lal, P., 2000. National forest policy and raw material supplies for wood Singh, K.D., Sinha, B., Mukherji, S.D., 2005. Exploring Options for Joint
based industries in India. Indian Forester, 126(4): 351–366. Forest Management in India. Forest policy and institutions working
Le, H.D., Smith, C., Herbohn, J., Harrison, S., 2012. More than just trees: paper, 7, FAO Rome.
Assessing reforestation success in tropical developing countries. Jour- Spies, T.A., Johnson, K.N., Burnett, K.M., Ohmann, J.L., McComb, B.C.,
nal of Rural Studies, 28(1): 5–19. Reeves, G.H., Bettinger, P., Kline, J.D., Yonts, B.G., 2007. Cumula-
Manoharan, T.R., 2011. Supply determinants of timber trade in India. tive ecological and social effects of forest policies in Coastal Oregon.
WWF report, Planning Commission, Government of India, Ecological Applications, 17(1): 5–17.
New Delhi, India UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme), 2016. Report of the
Marsh, D., McConnell, A., 2010. Towards a framework for establishing declaration of human environment in Stockholm 1972. Available at
policy success. Public Administration, 88(2): 564–583. http://www.unep.org/documents.multilingual/default.asp?Documen
McGinley, K., Cubbage, F.W., 2011. Governmental regulation and non- tID=97&ArticleID=1529&l=en (accessed 25 March 2016)
governmental certification of forests in the tropics: Policy, execution, Wang, S., Kooten, G.C., Wilson, B., 2004. Mosaic of Reform: Forest pol-
uptake and overlap in Costa Rica, Guatemala and Nicaragua. Forest icy in post 1978–China. Forest Policy and Economics, 6(1): 71–83.
Policy and Economics, 13(3): 206–220. WII (Wildlife Institute of India), 2015. Data of protected area. Available
Miyamoto, M., Parid, M., Aini, Z., Michinaka, T., 2014. Proximate and at http://www.wiienvis.nic.in/Database/Protected_Area_854.aspx
underlying causes of forest cover change in Peninsular Malaysia. For- (accessed 5 January 2016).
est Policy and Economics, 44(1): 18–25. Winkel, G., 2014. When the pendulum doesn’t find its center: Environ-
Mukerji, A.K., 2003. Forest policy reforms in india–evolution of the joint mental narratives, strategies, and forest policy change in the US
forest management approach. Paper submitted to the XII World For- Pacific Northwest. Global Environmental Change, 27: 84–95.
estry Congress, Quebec City, Canada. World Bank, 2006. India: Unlocking Opportunities for Forest–Dependent
Nathan, D., 2000. Timber in Meghalaya. Economic and Political Weekly, People in India. Washington, DC. Available at https://openknowledge.
35(4): 182–186. worldbank.org/handle/10986/8416. (accessed 23 February 2016).

World Bank, 2016. Data of forest area. Available at http://data.worldbank. Yasmi, Y., Broadhead, J., Enters, T., Genge, C., 2010. Forest Policies,
org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.K2 (accessed 5 January 2016). Legislation and Institutions in Asia and the Pacific. Trends and
WRI (World Resources Institute), WBCSD (World Business Council for Emerging Needs for 2020. Asia-Pacific Forestry Sector Outlook
Sustainable Development), 2013. Logging and export bans. Available Study II, Working Paper Series No. APFSOS II/WP/2010/34. Food
at http://sustainableforestproducts.org/node/552 (accessed 5 January and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO),
2016). Bangkok.

Impact of Forest Policies On Timber Production in India A Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of Forest Policies On Timber Production in India A Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of Forest Policies On Timber Production in India A Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Natural Resources Forum 40 (2016) 62–76 DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.

Impact of forest policies on timber production in India: a review

1. Introduction promote sustainable forest management and biodiversity

Country Years Event Features References

Table 2. Chronology of forest policies, acts and orders in India

Years Event Features

Upon independence, India went through an infrastructural 5

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

inferior timber and wood residues (GoI, 2012b). Moreover,

the ITTO, which states: “India has never provided reliable

Industry 1998* 1999* 2000* 2005* 2010* 2015† 2020†

*Represents actual demand of timber.

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

timber production in India. However, the decline in pro-

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

increase in imports (Figures 2 and 3). Being one of the top

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

Andhra Pradesh 46,116 63,814 195.83 0.14 102.15 1.94

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

© 2016 The Authors. Natural Resources Forum © 2016 United Nations

You might also like