Indigenous people’s attachment to shifting cultivation in the Eastern Himalayas, India: A cross-sectional evidence

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Forest Policy and Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol

Indigenous people’s attachment to shifting cultivation in the Eastern Himalayas, India: A cross-sectional evidence

T

Dileep Kumar Pandeya, Himansu Kumar Deb, Shantanu Kumar Dubeyc, Bagish Kumard, Shivani Dobhala,*, P. Adhigurue a

College of Horticulture & Forestry, Central Agricultural University (Manipur), Pasighat 791102, Arunachal Pradesh, India ICAR-Central Institute of Freshwater Aquaculture, Bhubaneswar 751002, Odisha, India c ICAR-Agricultural Technology Application Research Institute, Kanpur 208019, Uttar Pradesh, India d ICAR Research Complex for North Eastern Hill Region, Umiam 793103, Meghalaya, India e Agricultural Extension Division, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) Headquarters, Room No. 305, Krishi Anusandhan Bhavan - I, PUSA, 110012, New Delhi, India b

A R T I C LE I N FO

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Attachment to place Farming in north-eastern India Jhum Social bonding

Shifting cultivation (SC), or swidden, continues to be a predominant agricultural practice in some parts of NorthEast India despite efforts by the state to discourage that practice. The indigenous people persist in practising SC because it is part of their culture and traditions, because SC means much more to them than a means of livelihood, and also because of the lack of any worthwhile alternative. Empirical analysis revealed that such attachment or bonding takes three forms, namely nature-bonding (attachment to the natural landscape), social bonding (attachment to the local community and traditions), and economic bonding (attachment to the form of livelihood and to the place). In descending order of importance, the reasons were social bonding, lack of alternative livelihoods, economic bonding, and nature-bonding. The study – based on a survey of 500 respondents drawn from 52 villages, representing six states of North-East India –showed that SC is not merely an alternative method of farming but a form of landscape management that has not only evolved over centuries of experimentation but is also inseparable from the culture and the way of life of those who continue to practise SC. Even more important, contrary to the popular notion held by state officials and other agencies, SC provides a sustainable means of livelihood and food security to the indigenous people.

1. Introduction Across the world, millions of people depend upon their livelihood from shifting cultivation (SC), or swidden (Cramb, 2007; Mertz et al., 2009), which is practised over about 280 Mha (Heinimann et al., 2017). For several decades, local livelihoods have greatly depended on SC, which occupies a sizeable proportion of land under forests. Such a practice of SC on forest land is associated with production from secondary forests and cultivated fields. Over the years, the SC has turned into a land-use pattern and also such practices got integrated with other customs of uplands (Cairns, 2015; Conklin, 1961). Traditionally, SC consists of intermittent clearing and burning a small patch of a forest mainly to grow food crops for subsistence. After harvest of crops, the land is left fallow much longer than in normal farming so as to allow the cleared forest to regrow with plants and trees, and this practice of

fallowing provides ample scope for restoring the productive capacity of the land (Cramb et al., 2009). There is growing recognition that ecosystem services and livelihood security are being better supported by such long fallow periods that are part of SC. However, despite such recognition, a series of policies, especially in South East Asia and elsewhere reflect the perception that SC needs to be replaced with other types of land uses (Mertz and Bruun, 2016). Over the past four or five decades, the area under SC has been declining (Heinimann et al., 2017) due to economic, social, political, and other external disruptions in such places (Brown and Perkins, 1992; Feldman, 1996; Devine‐Wright, 2009). Though different development programmes which were implemented for transformation of SC have claimed that area under SC as well as number of households involved have reduced considerably, on the contrary large scale deforestation and loss of forest cover in NorthEast India due to SC had been reported by the Forest Survey of India

⁎

Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D.K. Pandey), [email protected] (H. Kumar De), [email protected] (S.K. Dubey), [email protected] (B. Kumar), [email protected] (S. Dobhal), [email protected] (P. Adhiguru). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102046 Received 6 April 2018; Received in revised form 21 October 2019; Accepted 21 October 2019 1389-9341/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

risks it poses (O’Brien, 2016); yet, such transformations have resulted in non-linear changes in norms and values, social networks, power structures, and institutional arrangements or regulations in a given ecosystem (IPCC, 2012). Several studies have highlighted the constraints to transformative adaptation while exploring the association between attachment to a place and the disruptions that follow when that attachment is severed (Clarke et al., 2016; Marshall et al., 2012). Masterson et al. (2017) highlighted the significance of the descriptive or objective meaning of a place and its evaluative or subjective meaning, which takes into account people’s attachment to a place, in studying the patterns of variation in the sense of a place within or among populations or related to different types of places and the consequences of that sense of place for resilience in coping with change and for transformative capacity. Van Vliet et al. (2012) observed that the socio-economic and environmental impacts of such transformation of land use away from SC towards other uses have generally been substantially negative. The participatory approach, which ensures inclusiveness in governance, can help in reducing the disruptions that follow changes occurring in a place and, in turn, would have a positive influence on place-related values (Von Wirth et al., 2016) and contribute to making the planning for adaptation to changes more effective. In this context, place attachment implies positive emotional links to a set of locations or to a set of landscapes and includes both physical and social elements (Devine-Wright, 2013; Lewicka, 2011). The attachment leads to specific individual and collective actions (Devine‐Wright, 2009; Manzo and Perkins, 2006). An individual’s experience of the environment results in place attachment which is driven by the length of residence and recreational opportunities, cultural values, mobility, and qualities of the natural landscape (Beery and Jönsson, 2017). Such dimensions as place dependence and place identity play a part in place attachment (Anton and Lawrence, 2016). A few functional features of a place help in certain activities and forge emotional connections; such a relationship framework is referred to as place dependence (Brown and Raymond, 2007), which is by and large due to the natural resources of the place, and also visiting it frequently increases such dependence (Vaske and Kobrin, 2001). Place identity, on the other hand, is shaped by physical and symbolic features of the place that become part of an individual’s sense of identity (Devine-Wright, 2013). It is this process of identification with a place, a long-term and complex process, that makes the place an integral part of a person’s identity (Anton and Lawrence, 2016; Lewicka, 2008). Place attachment encompasses different aspects of people–place bonding including emotions, effects, beliefs, knowledge, and behaviour associated with a given place (Chow and Healey, 2008). Place attachment is therefore a multidimensional concept (Gustafson, 2001; Scannell and Gifford, 2010a, 2010b) formed by multifaceted processes including social, psychological, and cultural processes (Low and Altman, 1992). In other words, people, processes, and place are all dimensions that are linked to personal attachments (Scannell and Gillford, 2010a) and predispose individuals to form affective connections with the environment (Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001a,b). The construct is crucial in understanding different kinds of human feedback mechanisms in the dynamics of a socio-ecological system and the way various factors such as values, cognitions, and perceptions of human relationships with nature support such responses (Chan et al., 2016; Von Heland and Folke, 2014; Raymond et al., 2013). The bulk of research on the sense of place has focused on peoples’ connections to high-amenity places and landscapes (Eaton et al., 2019), and the concept of ‘place’ has expanded beyond the notion of a setting to a cluster of attributes it offers, related primarily to valuable commodities and activities. More and more managers and scientists now realize the importance of understanding the meaning and the attachments people have for places that are special to them and of incorporating that understanding into resource planning and management. This awareness is important because people create “bonds with a locale based on a sense

(FSI, 2017). One of the plausible reasons is the promotion and expansion of settled agriculture such as terrace farming and plantations that has adversely affected regeneration of fallows, which would otherwise could have regrown into secondary forests. Further, in spite of multipronged efforts being made to transform SC into other land uses, a recent report of the Indian Government points out that about 8500 sq. km of area is still under SC in North-East India (Pant et al., 2018). This scenario makes one ponder as to “why Indigenous people are still attached with SC?” Therefore, there is a pressing need to understand the reasons for this kind of continuity of SC in view of the criticisms against this practice. Hence, the present study by applying place attachment theory seeks answer for such questions related to attachment i.e. place and place based practice. 2. Theoretical framework Getting insights into how people interpret changes in a place are particularly important in assessing people’s associations with the place and the probability that they will accept possible disruption that follows such changes (Devine‐Wright, 2009). Better insights can be achieved by framing and assessing place-related meanings through interpretative, evaluative, and attitudinal measures in relation to disruptive place changes (Devine-Wright and Howes, 2010). An earlier research study emphasized that any lacunae in understanding the nature of associations could be a threat to examining the attachment to a place (Anton and Lawrence, 2016). The growing information base emerging from several research studies on place attachment shows that it is essential to minimize disruptions or any negative effects for smoother adaptation to changes occurring in a place and to take into account place-related identities and meanings in policymaking and planning (Fresque‐Baxter and Armitage, 2012). Research has also shown that interpersonal relationships are greatly improved when people become attached to a place (Scannell and Gifford, 2010a, 2010b) and lead to a sense of ‘belonging to a group’ (Hammitt et al., 2009). Such improved interpersonal relationships and the sense of belonging are particularly tangible in SC as practised by a community that predominantly uses common property resources. The people–place interaction enables individuals to bond with other members of the community and thereby develops ‘place belongingness’ (Hammitt et al., 2006). Shifting cultivation is thus inextricably associated with land given the strong affinity to, and respect for, land and community-supported activities undertaken in the context of customary tenure and customary authority (Punitha et al., 2018). Owing to these kinds of reasons, SC though perceived as an enigma continues to be an accepted form of farming in large parts of North-East India even today. This continued practice of SC is observed in spite of the fact that the state has made consistent efforts to end this practice and even the community intends to change the practice if worthwhile potential substitutes are available (Pant et al., 2018). According to Low and Altman (1992, p.7), “Places are, repositories and contexts within which interpersonal, community, and cultural associateship occur, and it is those social relationships, not just to place qua place, to which people are attached.” The significance of place in social bonding is validated by several studies. A study by Kyle and Chick (2007) included agricultural fairs and place meanings and has thrown insights into the value of place as experienced with family and friends. Many researchers believe that social involvement, consisting of the community, friends, and family, is more important than only the physical attributes of a place (Marcus, 1992). Such results strengthen the possible perception that social bonding among individuals can encourage and influence pro-environment behaviours (Hargreaves and Nye, 2010). 2.1. Transformative adaptation and place attachment Transformative adaptation is considered appropriate approach to mitigating the adverse impacts of climate change and to reducing the 2

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

Fig. 1. India’s North-East and the study area.

Wasteland Atlas, 2000, 2008–2009).The large area under jhum and its continuation are a puzzle, because the system that has been considered economically unprofitable and labour intensive has withstood 60 years of systematic efforts to abolish it. Indeed, for indigenous people of the region jhum is not merely an agricultural land-use system but an integral part of life, deeply intertwined with all their rituals, customs, heritage, and festivals. These people maintain a comprehensive system of knowledge, technical know-how, and practices associated with jhum. All operations and stages in jhum are marked by some symbols and are based on profound science although the link may not always be apparent (Sharma, 2017; Bhagawati et al., 2015).

of place that involves sentiments extending beyond the use value of the land” (Eisenhauer et al., 2000, p.438). Although ecosystem management attempts to put silviculture and forest management into a broader spatial and historical context, it has not fully addressed the richness of the meaning that land has for the people and of the relationships they share with land (Kyle and Johnson, 2008). Understanding the symbolic dimensions of environments is critical to understanding what the implications of environmental stasis or change are and why conflicts over resource management become so contentious (Krannich et al., 1994). The present study was, therefore, a preliminary effort to gain some insights into the strength of the association between indigenous people and places in the context of SC as practised in the Indian Himalayas, because those insights would be useful in improving planning for better adaptation.

3.2. Data collection In South East Asia, data on the extent of jhum are inadequate because this system of cultivation mostly revolves around cultivating a piece of land for a short period followed by leaving it fallow for a long time—a type of land use that is difficult to capture on land-use maps or through statistical records (Schmidt-Vogt et al., 2009). Data on the number of people associated with SC at any given time are hard to come by even globally (Mertz et al., 2009)—data that are crucial to successful implementation of such programmes or initiatives as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), biodiversity conservation, and improvement of local livelihoods. However, maps and accurate data on the area under SC are not readily available (Heinimann et al., 2017; Cairns, 2015; Van Vliet et al., 2013). In India, data on the area under jhum and the total number of households practising it are neither authentic nor up-to-date, and data on the same variable from different agencies are inconsistent (Pant et al., 2018). Therefore, for the present study, secondary data on jhum were collected with the help of the forest departments of the respective states that make up India’s North-East and from the North Eastern Council, the main agency for economic and social development of the region. From each state, one district depending upon the extent or intensity of SC with the highest density of jhumia families was selected (Fig. 1). The sample of practising jhumias, drawn from a single district in each state, consisted of either 50 people or 100 people, depending on the size of the state from which the samples were collected: Upper Subansiri district in Arunachal Pradesh, Churachandpur in Manipur, West Garo hills in Meghalaya, and Mon in Nagaland each contributed the larger samples whereas Saiha in Mizoram and Dhalai in Tripura contributed the smaller samples, the total sample size being 500. Random sampling was

3. Research methods 3.1. Study region and the practice of shifting cultivation India’s North-East (21°50′– 29°34′ N, 85°34′– 97°50′ E), spread over 0.26 million km²,occupies 33 % of the Indian Himalayan Region (Nandy et al., 2006) or 8 % of India’s total geographic area and shares its borders with Bhutan, China, Myanmar, and Bangladesh. Of the total area of the region, 70 % is hilly and SC is the chief land use. Of the 635 ethnic groups in India, about 200 are found in the North-East (Dikshit and Dikshit, 2014). The landscape under SC is a mosaic of forests, fields, and fallow lands. India’s North-East is sometimes referred to as the land of shifting cultivators because it accounts for 83.73 % of the total area under SC in India (GoI, 2011). Indeed, forests in Asia are part of a cultural landscape (Ramakrishnan, 2007), which offers a range of ecosystem services to the traditional society. All of the six states chosen for the study have large areas under forests and together account for about 25 % of India’s forest cover and about 50 % of its biodiversity (Tiwari, 2018). In the region, SC is practiced in 8500 km² of forest area (MoSPI, 2014). Income from forest products as well as from crops has increased because of greater productivity resulting from fallows that are essential part of SC (Klemick, 2011). In the North-East, SC is also locally referred to as jhum, which is an Assamese term, and jhumias refers to the indigenous people who practise SC (Choudhury, 2004).In the late 2000s, jhum area occupied about a tenth of the net sown area in the region, whereas in the states with predominantly hilly terrain, jhum area occupied a fifth of the total area (Ministry of Agriculture, 2012; 3

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

Table 1 Location and the number of respondents. State

District forest cover (%)a

Distance from state capital (km)

Share of Scheduled Tribesb in total population (2011)c

Blocks

No. of villages

No. of the respondents

Arunachal Pradesh

Upper Subansari (79.22)

308

98.6

11

100

Manipur Meghalaya Mizoram Nagaland Tripura

Churachandpur (91.23) West Garo Hills (77.16) Siaha (86.13) Mon (67.58) Dhalai (82.50)

63 302 304 329 94

92.9 97.8 96.6 95.2 55.7

Puchi Geko, Dumporijo, Maro, Daporijo Hengelp, Singhat Rongram, Gambegre Siaha, Tipa Mon, Aboi Ambassa, Ganganagar 14

9 5 6 6 15 52

100 100 50 100 50 500

a b c

Forest Survey of India, 2017. Constitutional designation of ethnic groups. Census of India, 2011.

The scale used in the present study comprises amultidimensional construct of place attachment with four dimensions empirically relevant to the context of natural or rural land use. The scale encompassed three kinds of bonding, namely nature-bonding (attachment to the natural environment), social bonding (attachment to the local community and traditions), and economic bonding (attachment to the form of livelihood and to the place), each kind being a separate dimension. The fourth dimension was lack of alternative occupation. Indeed, economic livelihood values as an indicator of place dependence and social values as an indicator of place identity are more likely to be mapped within the place attachment area. Accordingly, the procedure used by Raymond et al. (2010) was adapted. The survey instrument, which had been validated and used by Punitha (2017) in the context of shifting cultivation landscape, was refined and used in the present study. The instrument comprised 18 items. All these items were arranged at random and the responses to each item were recorded in a uniform format. The respondents rated each of the 18 items on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (‘strongly disagree’) to 5 (‘strongly agree’), whereas the scores were reversed in the case of negatively worded items. Items for measuring nature-bonding were developed on the basis of phrases reflecting affiliation to and connectedness with nature (Schultz, 2001; Kals et al., 1999), and those for measuring social bonding were developed on the basis of phrases proposed by Kyle et al. (2005). Two methods were used for estimating total and inter-item correlations to place attachment: exploratory factor analysis involving summated scales (for rating the items) and principal component analysis with varimax rotation, as enunciated by Pearson (1901). The criteria adopted by Hammitt et al. (2006) were used in forming the factors, namely eigenvalue ≥ 1.0 and factor loading ≥ 0.40.

used, using the Tippett table of random numbers (Tippett, 1927). Details of the locations and respondents are given in Table 1. 3.3. Tools and data analysis The concept of a sense of place has been developed across several applications and settings over the past four decades. However, most of the theoretical developments have “privileged the slow”: in other words, place meanings have been slow to evolve (Raymond et al., 2017). A review of literature on measurement procedures indicates that scales with adequate psychometric properties are appropriate to capture information related to the concept of a place. In environmental psychology, psychometric scales have been extensively used for measuring two dimensions of place attachment, namely place meaning and place attachment (Lewicka, 2011). Such scales have also been used for measuring the extent of prevalence of the bonds between an individual and the broader elements of the social and biophysical context of a place (Kyle et al., 2005; Jorgensen and Stedman, 2006; Ramkissoon et al., 2013; Raymond et al., 2010). However, determining the type of theoretical perspective or methodological framework that can be used in a given situation presents some difficulties (Manzo and DevineWright, 2013). Several studies used a one-dimension scale with single factor structure for measuring place constructs. Even Hernández and Hidalgo (2014) considered place attachment as a unidimensional concept. There is also a two-dimensional model, which focuses on significant connections to the natural and the social environment. Approaches have been evolved for determining the level of an individual’s connections to nature, i.e. the extent of one’s identity with nature (Clayton and Opotow, 2003), affinity to nature (Kals et al., 1999), or connectedness to nature (Schultz and Tabanico, 2007: Schultz et al., 2004, 2002). Scholars who focused on social attachments found that the social and geographic contexts of place bonds need to be incorporated in research on place attachment, which may involve constructs such as belongingness and neighborhood attachment (Kyle and Chick, 2007; Brown et al., 2003; Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001a,b). There is another category of scales that determine place attachment as a multidimensional construct comprising a set of factors. For instance, Williams and Roggenbuck (1989) and Kyle et al. (2005) also included the social bond in the scale. The scale by Williams and Roggenbuck (1989) was used by Raymond et al. (2010) after adding items that cover the social bond and the nature bond. Raymond et al. (2010) suggested a four-dimensional model of the attachment of rural landholders to natural resources of their region. Such a model was evolved conceptually and empirically to develop an integrated approach to measuring attachment to place that clearly differentiates among various elements of place scholarship. In studying place attachment of indigenous people who depend predominantly upon natural resources, the scale used by Raymond et al. (2010) was found to be more appropriate because it is comprehensive in capturing the multi-dimensional factors that are linked to a place.

4. Results Principal component analysis and reliability analysis of responses to the 18-point place attachment scale revealed four underlying dimensions that were highly reliable (Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.70 or higher; Table 2). The eigenvalues show the importance of each of the principal components. Only the first three factors had eigenvalues greater than1.00 and together explained more than 99.83 % of the total variation in the data. This led us to conclude that a factor solution will probably be adequate. For analysing bonding, three validated dimensions were studied, namely economic bonding, social bonding, and nature-bonding. Four items were related to economic bonding; six, to social bonding; and another four, to nature-bonding, which loaded on the nature-bonding dimension with high reliability (Crobach’s alpha greater than 0.90). The item ‘On jhum lands, non-timber forest products (NTFP) fetch more income than other products’ loaded less strongly on economic bonding than other measures of economic bonding. However, this scale remained significant and contributed (factor loading greater than 0.88). Traditional institutional bonding emerged as a more 4

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

Table 2 Principal component analysis of indigenous people’s attachment to shifting cultivation. Item

Factor loading

Economic bonding (Eigenvalue = 3.86; variance explained = 96.61%) Jhumis have greater access to timber resources. Nowadays, in jhum, commercial crops are preferred to subsistence crops. On jhum lands, non-timber forest products (NTFP) fetch more income than other products. Jhum is a major source of food security for jhumias. Social bonding (Eigenvalue = 0.12; variance explained = 3.02%) Collective decision-making is not observed in managing jhum lands. Even now for jhum, exchange of labour among family members is governed by ancient norms. Customary laws not as strong as in the past. Jhum has to be continued generation after generation. Present generation does not manage jhum resources as well as the earlier generations did. Common property regime for land tenure is the best for maintaining jhum. Nature-bonding (Eigenvalue = 0.01; variance explained = 0.20%) Jhumis more laborious than settled cultivation. Jhumias have abundant jhum land. Jhum is affected more than settled cultivation because of climate change. Failure of one crop in jhum does not pose a problem because jhumias grow a variety of food crops. Lack of alternative occupation (Eigenvalue = 0.01; variance explained = 0.17%) Jhumias have no other means of livelihood other than jhum. Jhumias lack the knowledge to pursue any activity or occupation other than jhum. Off-farm opportunities to earn more may make Jhumias give up jhum. Inadequate employment opportunities in village compel the younger generation to continue with jhum.

Grand mean

Item mean

Standard deviation

3.93

Cronbach’s alpha 0.95

1.00 0.97 0.88 0.99

4.20 3.62 3.66 4.23

1.02 0.78 0.83 1.05

3.57

0.98

0.91 0.92 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.93

3.41 3.76 3.78 3.78 3.58 3.22

0.55 0.77 0.76 0.68 0.72 0.69

3.73

0.90

0.98 0.94 0.97 0.97

4.14 3.19 3.97 3.63

0.95 0.64 1.00 1.01

3.48

0.96

0.98 0.97 1.00 0.99

3.42 3.07 3.67 3.76

0.59 0.73 0.77 0.85

continuous residence in the region by an immediate family member. These results are consistent with the expected framework and therefore justify the correlation between the demographic variables of respondents.

efficient dimension with maximum of six dimensions scales. Six items loaded strongly on this dimension. The correlation among the demographic variables and the four dimensions of place attachments was estimated (Table 3). Economic bonding was positively and highly significantly (p < 0.01) correlated to all the variables studied. As shown in Table 3, economic bonding was significantly and positively correlated to the length of residence (r > 0.98; p < 0.01), followed by nature-bonding, which was significantly and positively correlated to all the variables. The length of respondents’ experience with jhum was significantly correlated (p < 0.01) to place attachment. However, no significant correlation was observed between any of the respondents’ demographic variables and social bonding. Similarly, although economic bonding was expected to emerge as a construct with a distinct dimension and high validity, the results belied that expectation—which was fulfilled instead by nature-bonding, and four items loaded strongly on that dimension (factor loading > 0.97). The item ‘Jhumias have abundant jhum land’ loaded less strongly on nature-bonding than on the other three dimensions. Further, the correlation between the length of continuous residence in the region by an immediate family member and social bonding was non-significant. It is also clear from Table 3 that lack of alternative occupation was positively and significantly correlated to the length of residence, the number of generations that had practised jhum, and the knowledge of jhum but had no correlation with the other two variables, namely length of experience with jhum and length of

5. Discussion The present study sought to find out how people’s commitment to the stewardship of SC landscape can be increased and, to find the answers, used empirical examination of some crucial dimensions of the human–environment interaction at place-based level. Based on our literature review, we identified four main dimensions to investigate, namely economic bonding, nature-bonding, traditional institution/social bonding, and lack of alternative occupation. Salient outcomes of the analysis of variables on these four dimensions are presented here and may prove useful in devising appropriate strategies related to policy, management, education, and awareness raising to achieve the aim stated above, namely greater commitment to the stewardship of SC landscape. 5.1. Social bonding The construct of social bonding was closely associated with place. Although during the study the indigenous people expressed the opinion that SC will continue generation after generation –the highest factor

Table 3 Correlation between demographic variables of respondents and four dimensions of place attachment to jhum. Demographic variable

Place attachment

Economic bonding

Social bonding

Nature-bonding

Lack of alternative occupation

Length of residence (0–100 years) Length of experience with jhum (0–100 years) Number of generations practising jhum (0–5) Longest continuous residence in the region by an immediate family member (0–100 years) Knowledge of jhum or hill farming

0.98** 0.88 0.97** 0.92*

0.98** 0.96** 0.97** 0.98**

0.97** 0.84 0.96* 0.88

0.98** 0.92* 1.00** 0.97**

0.91* 0.78 0.91* 0.87

0.96*

0.89*

0.95*

0.95*

1.00**

* and **, significant at 0.05 and 0.01, respectively (2-tailed). 5

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

food security. The other two variables with comparable factor loading were a preference for commercial crops and the emerging preference for NTFP to ensure greater economic security. Such a perception may have its roots in the belief that for any land management system, what matters most is economic returns from the system—a belief borne out by the observation that all the demographic variables of the respondents were significantly (p < 0.01) associated with economic bonding. The community dependent on SC benefitted by the alternative means of subsistence offered by SC landscapes and the surrounding forests. If crops fail, forest resources can augment food supply and also serve as a source of house-building materials, fuel wood, and timber. Reciprocally, forest products and other services from SC landscapes and surrounding forest fallows can sustain SC (Padoch et al., 2007). Thus SC provides a safety net to jhumias, helping them to cope with market volatility related to the goods linked to their livelihood (Cramb et al., 2009; Sulistyawati et al., 2005). Because these indigenous people generally live in relatively inaccessible mountainous and hilly locations, they have to depend – partly or fully and directly or indirectly – on SC for their subsistence and livelihood (Sunderlin et al., 2005). For these reasons, jhumias derive higher sense of economic security from jhum and display stronger attachment to place.

loading was in this component–the earlier generations practised SC more effectively than the present generation, probably because the current generation has perception of low status associated with farm activities. Also, the mores and the customs association with SC are less strong now than in the past; as a result, decision-making related to SC is no longer collective although the traditional methods are being continuously used for labour management. The jhumias, contrary to the above observations, continue to believe that the land tenure system based on common property is the best option for effective and sustainable management of SC. However, such demographic variables as the length of residence of the main family member, the number of generations practising SC, and knowledge of SC and of hill farming were significantly (p < 0.01) associated with social bonding. The system of SC helps the indigenous people to sustain their rich cultural traditions and diversity because SC is closely intertwined with their culture and tradition. For instance, besides slashing and burning, SC also encompasses other cultural activities such as worshipping gods and goddesses and making them offerings of freshly harvested produce (Lombi, 2016; Das and Das, 2014). Whereas the local and inherited knowledge of the indigenous people used in conserving biodiversity focuses more on life forms of economic importance, the customs, mores, laws, rituals, taboos, metaphors, proverbs, and other components help in conserving forests and wildlife (Mavhura and Mushure, 2019). The totem emblems, for instance, are viewed as protecting agents. In turn, social bonds among members of a community are strengthened through such culturally imbibed practices.

5.4. Nature-bonding Nature-bonding emerged as the fourth important dimension of the attachment to place displayed by jhumias. Among the many items under this dimension was the contention of jhumias that although SC too is affected by climate change, the failure of a crop due to any adversity is not a serious problem for them because another crop, from several crops that are part of jhum system, gives them more or less the same quantity of produce. That is why, despite SC being cumbersome and labour intensive, the indigenous people of the region prefer SC to other systems of land management. Besides, nature has plenty of SC lands to offer to increase the probability that jhumias earn a livelihood and survive. Therefore, all the five demographic variables were significantly and positively (p < 0.01) correlated to this dimension of place attachment. Although SC is often believed to be a cause of deforestation, forests are always sacred to the indigenous communities (Mishra, 2009), who believe that forest are a source of power for the deities; that is why indigenous communities worship nature (Manasi and Raju, 2019). A large proportion of land in these hilly regions is covered by forests (Table 1 and Fig. 1) despite centuries of SC. The dense forests supply most of the resources people need to survive and to make a living, right from materials to build a house to medicines, and do so sustainably (Bhagawati et al., 2015). Thus, SC landscapes act as a strong link between nature and culture, a link that fortifies nature-bonding and proves the pro-environmental behaviour of jhumias.

5.2. Lack of alternative occupation The second most important factor for place attachment was the lack of alternative occupation: four important variables under it had a differential level of factor loading. The analysis showed that if suitable alternatives to SC are offered to jhumias, they may be willing to give up SC: the respondents maintained that no such alternatives were available to them, and they resorted to SC only to ensure food security of their households. This contention was supported by another similar fact that villages were offered no worthwhile opportunities, thereby the jhumias continue to stick to their traditional practices (Pandey et al., 2019; Heinimann et al., 2013). The other two variables were also interlinked, which, in away, reflects the lack of alternatives. This dimension of attachment was significantly and positively correlated to all the variables except one, namely length of continuous residence in the region by an immediate family member. Furthermore, households in the developing countries often have inadequate access to such critical facilities as insurance, which makes many people prefer livelihood strategies that help in spreading the risk over time or across activities to those strategies that merely maximize returns (Barrett et al., 2001). One of the best ways of spreading risk is to engage in a wide range of activities so that households can dynamically change the mix of activities (and the priority accorded to them) depending on the circumstances at any given time. Because SC offers just such flexible options, most people in the study area continue with SC as the predominant means of livelihood. However, some livelihood-focused interventions aimed at conservation often inappropriately equate monetary benefits and other economic substitutes with the wants and needs of local people (Berkes, 2013). However, to be a genuine substitute, the alternative interventions must also satisfy the less tangible needs and aspirations of the jhumias and serve the same set of functions that are characteristic of the original activity, namely SC.

5.5. Limitations of the study and future research The present study was a preliminary attempt to introduce the construct of attachment to a place as a useful construct in discussing the sustainability of SC in the Indian Himalayan region. The study empirically revealed the role of traditional institutions of indigenous people in continuing with SC. Although the present study incorporated the multidimensional construct of place attachment based on the scale used by Raymond et al. (2010), conformity factor analysis was not carried out. Furthermore, measurements of place attachment varied among the samples depending on the context. One plausible explanation for such variation may lie in linguistic differences despite adopting standard methods of forward and backward translation. Several researchers (e.g. Trentelman, 2009; Kyle and Johnson, 2008) have also attributed the observed differences in place conceptualization to the differences inexperience and cultural backgrounds. Hence, it may be that the existing place-identity items are sensitive to these differences and lead to variations in the measurements. Therefore, future research

5.3. Economic bonding Economic bonding emerged as the third important factor responsible for place attachment shown by the jhumias. Among the items related to economics, jhumias’ greater access to timber resources emerged as the predominant variable (factor loading of 1), followed by 6

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

should seek to identify the sources of variance within each item and may involve matters related to language or behaviour or experience including gender and their level of bonding with SC as majority respondents (87 %) were male in the present study. Future research should also focus on compiling an exhaustive list of preferred activities, experience use history, mode of experience, and other variables that may influence how people experience a place, because this information would be useful in gauging how people respond to particular items aimed at measuring place identity across contexts. The present study was based on information obtained at a single point in time, whereas a longitudinal study would provide a deeper understanding of place attachment.

47, 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.010. Barrett, C.B., Reardon, T., Webb, P., 2001. Nonfarm income diversification and household livelihood strategies in rural Africa: concepts, dynamics, and policy implications. Food Policy 26, 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-9192(01)00014-8. Beery, T., Jönsson, K.I., 2017. Outdoor recreation and place attachment: exploring the potential of outdoor recreation within a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour. 17, 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2017.01.002. Berkes, F., 2013. Poverty reduction isn’t just about money: community perceptions of conservation benefits. In: Dilys Roe, D., Elliott, J., Sandbrook, C., Walpole, C. (Eds.), Biodiversity Conservation and Poverty Alleviation: Exploring the Evidence for a Link. John Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey, pp. 270–285. Bhagawati, K., Bhagawati, G., Das, R., Bhagawati, R., Ngachan, S.V., 2015. The structure of Jhum (traditional shifting cultivation system): prospect or threat to climate. Int. Lett. Nat. Sci. 46, 16–30. Brown, B.B., Perkins, D.D., 1992. Disruptions in place attachment. Place Attachment. Springer, Boston, MA, pp. 279–304. Brown, B., Perkins, D.D., Brown, G., 2003. Place attachment in a revitalizing neighborhood: individual and block levels of analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 23 (3), 259–271. Brown, G., Raymond, C., 2007. The relationship between place attachment and landscape values: toward mapping place attachment. Appl. Geogr. 27, 89–111. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.apgeog.2006.11.002. Cairns, M.F., 2015. Shifting Cultivation and Environmental Change: Indigenous People, Agriculture and Forest Conservation. Routledge, London. Chan, K.M., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S., Gomez-Baggethun, E., Gould, R., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S., Luck, G.W., 2016. Opinion: why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 113, 1462–1465. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113. Choudhury, A., 2004. Human–elephant conflicts in northeast India. Hum. Dimens. Wildl. 9, 261–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871200490505693. Chow, K., Healey, M., 2008. Place attachment and place identity: first-year undergraduates making the transition from home to university. J. Environ. Psychol. 28, 362–372. Clarke, D., Murphy, C., Lorenzoni, I., 2016. Barriers to transformative adaptation: responses to flood risk in Ireland. J. Extreme Events 3, 1650010. https://doi.org/10. 1142/S234573761650010X. Clayton, S., Opotow, S., 2003. ). Introduction: Identity and the Natural Environment. Conklin, H.C., 1961. The study of shifting cultivation. Curr. Anthropol. 2, 27–61. Cramb, R.A., 2007. Land and Longhouse: Agrarian Transformation in the Uplands of Sarawak. NIAS Press, Leifsgade, Denmark. Cramb, R.A., Colfer, C.J.P., Dressler, W., Laungaramsri, P., Le, Q.T., Mulyoutami, E., Peluso, N.L., Wadley, R.L., 2009. Swidden transformations and rural livelihoods in Southeast Asia. Hum. Ecol. 37, 323–346. Das, S., Das, M., 2014. Shifting cultivation in Tripura: acritical analysis. J. Agric. Life Sci. 1, 48–54. Devine‐Wright, P., 2009. Rethinking NIMBYism: the role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place‐protective action. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 19, 426–441. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.1004. Devine-Wright, P., 2013. Think global, act local? The relevance of place attachments and place identities in a climate changed world. Global Environ. Change 23, 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.08.003. Devine-Wright, P., Howes, Y., 2010. Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: a wind energy case study. J. Environ. Psychol. 30, 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.008. Dikshit, K.R., Dikshit, J.K., 2014. North-east India: Land, People and Economy. Springer, Dordrecht. Eaton, W.M., Eanes, F.R., Ulrich-Schad, J.D., Burnham, M., Church, S.P., Arbuckle, J.G., Cross, J.E., 2019. Trouble with Sense of Place in working landscapes. Soc. Natur. Resour . 32 (7), 827–840. Eisenhauer, B.W., Krannich, R.S., Blahna, D.J., 2000. Attachments to special places on public lands: An analysis of activities, reason for attachments, and community connections. Soc. Natur. Resour. 13 (5), 421–441. Feldman, R.M., 1996. Constancy and change in attachments to types of settlements. Environ. Behav. 28, 419–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916596284001. Fresque‐Baxter, J.A., Armitage, D., 2012. Place identity and climate change adaptation: a synthesis and framework for understanding. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 3, 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.164. FSI, 2017. State of Forest Report 2017. Forest Survey of India (Ministry of Environment & Forests), Dehra Dun, India. GoI, 2011. Wasteland Atlas of India.Department of Land Resources (Ministry of Rural Development), New Delhi. dolr.nic.in/dolr/wasteland_atlas.asp (Accessed 19 July 2017). . Gustafson, P., 2001. Meanings of place: everyday experience and theoreticalconceptualizations. J. Environ. Psychol. 21, 5–16. Hammitt, W.E., Backlund, E.A., Bixler, R.D., 2006. Place bonding for recreation places: conceptual and empirical development. Leis. Stud. 25, 17–41. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02614360500098100. Hammitt, W.E., Kyle, G.T., Oh, C.O., 2009. Comparison of place bonding models in recreation resource management. J. Leis. Res. 41, 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00222216.2009.11950159. Hargreaves, T., Nye, M., 2010. Exploring the social dynamics of proenvironmental behaviourchange: a comparative study of intervention processes at home and work. J. Ind. Ecol. 14, 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530–9290.2009.00193.x. Heinimann, A., Hett, C., Hurni, K., Messerli, P., Epprecht, M., Jørgensen, L., Breu, T., 2013. Socio-economic perspectives on shifting cultivation landscapes in northern Laos. Hum. Ecol. 41, 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-013-9564-1. Heinimann, A., Mertz, O., Frolking, S., Christensen, A.E., Hurni, K., Sedano, F., Chini,

6. Conclusions The present study has contributed in bridging the scholarships of place attachment and sustainability transitions in SC’ instead of pursuing the simplistic argument that place is important in sustainability transitions. Based on empirical evidence and conceptual bridging of the two domains of scholarships, it can be concluded that place is a prime attraction for people to continue practising SC and also contributes to the sustainability of SC and other uses of forests. In this context, empirical evidence reveals that place attachment, especially place dependence, is the major reason why the controversial practice of SC persists and that biophysical resources predispose the jhumias to continue with SC as the means to sustain their livelihood. Over the years, the jhumias, based on their experience, informal experimentation, and observations, and through trial and error, have developed alternative ways of using their biophysical resources—ways that are in harmony with their culture; ensure that SC continues to be sustainable; and strengthen people’s attachment to a place, which is a typical of any people–place symbiosis. In the light of these findings, we should consider the fundamental aspects that people care about and motivate them to overcome the obstacles to pursue sustainable agriculture at the same time safeguarding their livelihood security. Lastly, the results of the study also provide insights into relevant but intangible factors such as values and perceptions that link the practice of SC and place attachment and how they could be integrated into socio-ecological systems. Funding This study was supported by the Division of Agricultural Extension, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi, India. Grant Reference: File No. A.Extn.26/10/2015-AE-I/01. Declaration of Competing Interest All the authors here declare that they have no conflict of interest in this publication. Acknowledgements We acknowledge the support obtained from Senior Scientist cum Head, Krishi Vigyan Kendras and District Forest Officers of the districts covered under the study for their facilitation and monitoring during data collection work. In addition, we sincerely acknowledge the participation of respondent jhumias and key informants during survey work. Administrative support extended by the Director of Research, Central Agricultural University, Imphal, Manipur; Dean, College of Post Graduate Studies, Umiam, Meghalaya and Dean, College of Horticulture and Forestry, Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh is gratefully acknowledged. References Anton, C.E., Lawrence, C., 2016. The relationship between place attachment, the theory of planned behaviour and residents’ response to place change. J. Environ. Psychol.

7

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

swidden in southeast Asia? Local realities and regional ambiguities. Geogr. Tidsskr. Dan. J. Geogr. 107, 29–41. Pandey, D.K., Adhiguru, P., De, H.K., 2019. Attachment to shifting cultivation among Konyak Naga tribe in Eastern Himalaya: choice or compulsion? Curr. Sci. 116, 1387–1391. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v116/i8/1387–1391. Pant, R.M., Tiwari, B.K., Choudhury, D., 2018. Report of Working Group III, Shifting Cultivation: Towards a Transformational Approach. NITI Aayog, New Delhi. Pearson, K., 1901. Principal components analysis. Lond. Edinburgh Dublin Phil. Mag. J. Sci. 6 p.559. Punitha, P., 2017. Jhumias of Manipur in North-east India: A Livelihood Analysis, Ph. D. Thesis. School of Social Sciences, College of Post Graduate Studies, Central Agricultural University (Imphal), Umiam, Meghalaya, India. Punitha, P., Ansari, M.A., Pandey, D.K., Ram, D., Datt, S., Sharma, P.K., Aheibam, M., Jyothi, S.S.P., Prakash, N., 2018. Shifting cultivation in North East India: social dimension, cross cultural reflection and strategies for improvement. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 88, 811–819. Ramakrishnan, P.S., 2007. Traditional forest knowledge and sustainable forestry: a northeast India perspective. Forest Ecol. Manage. 249, 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foreco.2007.04.001. Ramkissoon, H., Smith, L.D.G., Weiler, B., 2013. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: a structural equation modelling approach. Tour. Manage. 36, 552–566. Raymond, C.M., Kyttä, M., Stedman, R., 2017. Sense of place, fast and slow: the potential contributions of affordance theory to sense of place. Front. Psychol. 8, 1674. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01674. Raymond, C.M., Brown, G., Weber, D., 2010. The measurement of place attachment: personal, community, and environmental connections. J. Environ. Psychol. 30, 422–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.08.002. Raymond, C.M., Singh, G.G., Benessaiah, K., Bernhardt, J.R., Levine, J., Nelson, H., Turner, N.J., Norton, B., Tam, J., Chan, K.M., 2013. Ecosystem services and beyond: using multiple metaphors to understand human–environment relationships. Bio. Sci. 63, 536–546. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.7.7. Scannell, L., Gifford, R., 2010b. The relations between natural and civic place attachment and pro-environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 30, 289–297. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.010. Scannell, L., Gifford, R., 2010a. Defining place attachment: a tripartite organizing framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 30, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09. 006. Schmidt-Vogt, D., Leisz, S.J., Mertz, O., Heinimann, A., Thiha, T., Messerli, P., Epprecht, M., Van Cu, P., Chi, V.K., Hardiono, M., Dao, T.M., 2009. An assessment of trends in the extent of swidden in Southeast Asia. Hum. Ecol. 37, 269. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10745-009-9239-0. Schultz, P.W., 2002. Inclusion with nature: the psychology of human-nature relations. In: Schmuck, P., Schultz, W.P. (Eds.), Psychology of Sustainable Development. Springer, Boston, MA. Schultz, P.W., Tabanico, J., 2007. Self, identity, and the natural environment: exploring implicit connections with nature 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 37 (6), 1219–1247. Schultz, P.W., Shriver, C., Tabanico, J.J., Khazian, A.M., 2004. Implicit connections with nature. J. Environ. Psychol. 24 (1), 31–42. Schultz, P.W., 2001. The structure of environmental concern: concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. J. Environ. Psychol. 21, 327–339. https://doi.org/10. 1006/jevp.2001.0227. Sharma, S., 2017. The third perspective on shifting cultivation. Space Cult. India 5, 21–31. https://doi.org/10.20896/SACI.V5I2.25210.20896/saci.v5i2.252. Sulistyawati, E., Noble, I.R., Roderick, M.L., 2005. A simulation model to study land use strategies in swidden agriculture systems. Agric. Syst. 85, 271–288. Sunderlin, W.D., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., Santoso, L., Wunder, S., 2005. Livelihoods, forests, and conservation in developing countries: an overview. World Dev. 33, 1383–1402. Tippett, L.H.C., 1927. Random Sampling Numbers.Tracts for Computers no. 15. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. Tiwari, B.K., 2018. Issues Related to Sustainable Management of Forest of Northeast India. pp. 24. Forests of_North-East_India (Accessed 21 July 2019). https://www. researchgate.net/publication/325618318.Issues_related_to_ SustainableManagementof. Trentelman, C.K., 2009. Place attachment and community attachment: a primer grounded in the lived experience of a community sociologist. Soc. Nat. Resour. 22 (3), 191–210. Van Vliet, N., Mertz, O., Birch-Thomsen, T., Schmook, B., 2013. Is there a continuing rationale for swidden cultivation in the 21st century? Hum. Ecol. 41, 1–5. Van Vliet, N., Mertz, O., Heinimann, A., Langanke, T., Pascual, U., Schmook, B., Adams, C., Schmidt-Vogt, D., Messerli, P., Leisz, S., Castella, J.C., 2012. Trends, drivers and impacts of changes in swidden cultivation in tropical forest-agriculture frontiers: a global assessment. Global Environ. Change 22, 418–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. gloenvcha.2011.10.009. Vaske, J.J., Kobrin, K.C., 2001. Place attachment and environmentally responsible behavior. J. Environ. Educ. 32, 16–21. Von Heland, J., Folke, C., 2014. A social contract with the ancestors: culture and ecosystem services in southern Madagascar. Global Environ. Change 24, 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.11.003. Von Wirth, T., Gret-Regamey, A., Moser, C., Stauffacher, M., 2016. Exploring the influence of perceived urban change on residents’ place attachment. J. Environ. Psychol. 46, 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.03001. Wasteland Atlas, 2000. 2008–2009. Wastelands Atlas of India. National Remote Sensing Centre, Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi, India. Williams, D.R., Roggenbuck, J.W., 1989. Measuring place attachment: some preliminary

L.P., Sahajpal, R., Hansen, M., Hurtt, G., 2017. A global view of shifting cultivation: recent, current, and future extent. PLoS One 12https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0184479. p.e0184479. Hidalgo, M.C., Hernandez, B., 2001a. Place attachment: conceptual and empirical questions. J. Environ. Psychol. 21 (3), 273–281. Hidalgo, M.C., Hernandez, B., 2001b. Place attachment: conceptual and empirical questions. J. Environ. Psychol. 21, 273–281. IPCC, 2012. Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. In: Field, C.B., Barros, V.R., Stocker, T., Qin, D., Dokken, D., Ebi, K.L. (Eds.), Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK http://ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/ images/uploads/SREX-All_FINAL.pdf (Accessed 3 July 2019). Jorgensen, B.S., Stedman, R.C., 2006. A comparative analysis of predictors of sense of place dimensions: attachment to, dependence on, and identification with lakeshore properties. J. Environ. Manage. 79 (3), 316–327. Kals, E., Schumacher, D., Montada, L., 1999. Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environ. Behav. 31, 178–202. https://doi.org/10. 1177/00139169921972056. Klemick, H., 2011. Shifting cultivation, forest fallow, and externalities in ecosystem services: evidence from the Eastern Amazon. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 61, 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2010.07.003. Kyle, G., Chick, G., 2007. The social construction of a sense of place. Leis. Sci. 29, 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400701257922. Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., 2005. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment in recreational settings. Environ. Behav. 37, 153–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0013916504269654. Kyle, G.T., Johnson, C.Y., 2008. Understanding cultural variation in place meaning. In: Kruger, L.E., Hall, T.E., Stiefel, M.C. (Eds.), Understanding Concepts of Place in Recreation Research and Management. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep, Portland, OR, pp. 109–134 PNW-GTR-744. Lewicka, M., 2008. Place attachment, place identity, and place memory: restoring the forgotten city past. J. Environ. Psychol. 28, 209–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvp.2008.02.001. Lewicka, M., 2011. Place attachment: how far have we come in the last 40 years? J. Environ. Psychol. 31, 207–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.10.001. Lombi, P., 2016. People’s perception about shifting cultivation - with special reference to the Galo tribe of West Siang district, Arunachal Pradesh (India). Int. J. Sci. Res. Publ. 6, 454–459. Low, S.M., Altman, I., 1992. Place attachment: a conceptual enquiry. In: In: Altman, I., Low, S.M. (Eds.), Place Attachment.Human Behavior and Environment (Advances in Theory and Research) 12. Springer, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 1–12. Manasi, S., Raju, K.V., 2019. Cultural influences on health, traditions and ecology. In: Manasi, S., Raju, K.V. (Eds.), Coping Mechanisms for Climate Change in Peri-Urban Areas. Springer, pp. 123–153. Manzo, L.C., Devine-Wright, P., 2013. Place Attachment: Advances in Theory, Methods and Applications. Routledge. Manzo, L.C., Perkins, D.D., 2006. Finding common ground: the importance of place attachment to community participation and planning. J. Plan. Lit. 20, 335–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412205286160. Marcus, C.C., 1992. Environmental memories. In: In: Altman, I., Low, S.M. (Eds.), Place Attachment.Human Behavior and Environment (Advances in Theory and Research) 12. Springer, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 87–112. Marshall, N.A., Park, S.E., Adger, W.N., Brown, K., Howden, S.M., 2012. Transformational capacity and the influence of place and identity. Environ. Res. Lett. 7https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034022. p.034022. Masterson, V.A., Stedman, R.C., Enqvist, J., Tengö, M., Giusti, M., Wahl, D., Svedin, U., 2017. The contribution of sense of place to social-ecological systems research: a review and research agenda. Ecol. Soc. 22, 49. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08872220149. Mavhura, E., Mushure, S., 2019. Forest and wildlife resource-conservation efforts based on indigenous knowledge: the case of Nharira community in Chikomba district, Zimbabwe. Forest Policy Econ. 105, 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019. 05.019. Mertz, O., Bruun, T.B., 2016. Shifting cultivation policies in Southeast Asia: does criminalizing traditional farming practices make them go away? In: Cairns, M. (Ed.), Shifting Cultivation Policy: Trying to Get It Right. Earthscan (Routledge) Press, Oxford. Mertz, O., Leisz, S.J., Heinimann, A., Rerkasem, K., Dressler, W., Pham, V.C., Vu, K.C., Schmidt-Vogt, D., Colfer, C.J., Epprecht, M., Padoch, C., 2009. Who counts? Demography of swidden cultivators in Southeast Asia. Hum. Ecol. 37, 281–289. Ministry of Agriculture, 2012. All India Report on Agriculture Census. Department of Agriculture & Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India Retrieved 15 January, 2015, from http://agricoop.nic.in/. Mishra, M.K., 2009. Sacred worldview in tribal memory: sustaining nature through cultural actions. Language Ecol. 2, 1–7. MoSPI, 2014. Statistical Year Book India 2014. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, New Delhi (Accessed 23 March 2019). http://www.mospi.gov.in/ statistical-year-book-india/2014. Nandy, S.N., Dhyani, P.P., Samal, P.K., 2006. Resource Information Database of the Indian Himalaya. Environmental Information System on Himalayan Ecology. GP Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development, Almora, Uttarakhand, India. O’Brien, K.L., 2016. Climate change and social transformations: is it time for a quantum leap? Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 7, 618–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/ wcc.413. Padoch, C., Coffey, K., Mertz, O., Leisz, S.J., Fox, J., Wadley, R.L., 2007. The demise of

8

Forest Policy and Economics 111 (2020) 102046

D.K. Pandey, et al.

results. In: San Antonio, TX. NRPA Symposium on Leisure Research Vol. 9.

Bagish Kumar is a scientist at ICAR Research Complex for North Eastern Hill Region, Umiam, Meghalaya. His area of interest is extension methodologies for TOT.

Dileep Kumar Pandey is an Associate Professor in the Department of Social Sciences, College of Horticulture & Forestry, Central Agricultural University (Manipur), Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh, India. His research interest includes agricultural extension and tribal development.

Shivani Dobhal is an assistant professor working in College of Horticulture & Forestry, Central Agricultural University (Manipur), Arunachal Pradesh, India. Her research focused on improvement in forestry ecology in different aspects of economic upliftment of community based forestry farming.

Himanshu Kumar De is a Principal Scientist in the social science section at ICAR-Central Institute of Freshwater Aquaculture, Bhubaneswar-751002, Odisha, India. His research works focused on empowerment of fishers’ community.

P. Adhiguru is a Principal Scientist at ICAR- Agricultural Extension Division Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) Headquarters, Room No. 305, Krishi Anusandhan Bhavan - I, PUSA, New Delhi-110012. His research works devoted towards transfer of technology and preparing policy framework on agricultural extension.

Shantanu Kumar Dubey is a Principal Scientist at ICAR-Agricultural Technology Application Research Institute, Kanpur-208019, Uttar Pradesh, India. His research works devoted towards transfer of technology and its application.

9