ABSTRACT

In contrast to Nepal, India is a large and powerful country. Within India, states’ widely differing local circumstances intersect with national forestry processes and structures, particularly since forestry remains a concurrent subject under the constitution, with different aspects coming under the purview of either the central government or the state governments. The three states chosen for study were selected on the basis of their high levels of poverty and high levels of forest-dependent poor households, as well as to reflect a range of different patterns of PFM: local self-initiated, administration initiated and donor promoted.