- Email: [email protected]
Erosion of common property resources: Evidence from villages in the dryzone districts of Sri Lanka
Agricultural
Administration
23 (1986) 191-199
Erosion of Common Property Resources:Evidence from Villages in the Dryzone Districts of Sri Lanka C. Bogahawatte Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, University of Peradeniya, Old Galaha Road, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka (Received: 24 June, 1985)
SUMMARY Common property resources form a major agricultural resource base in the villages of Sri Lanka, but they have deteriorated in recent years. This research study was conducted in two districts of Sri Lanka to investigate the major causes of the erosion of the common property resources. The irregular felhng of trees for timber, clearing and the burning af forests for rainfed rotational cultivation were evident in the study villages. The over-grazing of the communalpastures is not a serious problem due to the low cattle/buj.Kalo population. The income from the common property resources is signtficant in the drier districts.
INTRODUCTION The common property resourcesin a typical Sri Lankan village include community forests and pastures, rivers/river beds, streams, ponds or ground water resources,banks of village roads, and village forests. The benefits derived from thesecommon property resourcesby communities vary. For example, the community forests/village forests provide the villages with food, their fodder supply, grazing grounds for cattle and other livestock, and manure for rainfed crops. They also serve as a source of resource conservation and environment improvement. The communal pastures provide fodder supply for cattle, manure for crops, and help to conserve soil-moisture, in addition to 191
0309-586X/86/$03.50 Elsevier Applied SciencePublishers Ltd, England, 1986. Printed in Great Britain
Agricultural
Administration
192
C. Bogahawatte
their role in environment improvement and resourceconservation. The ponds/tanks/rivers and streams provide irrigation for crops, food, and water for drinking and cleaning. The river/pond banks also provide silt as a source of building material. The ground water sources, tapped in the form of deep wells, provide water for drinking and home use, irrigation of crops, soil moisture conservation, and are a form of resource conservation. The deterioration of the common property resources has been evident in the village communities due to factors such as over-exploitation, institutional changes,and government policies. This paper attempts to highlight the major contributions of the common property resources and the factors affecting the deterioration of such resourcesin the Badulla and Moneragala districts of Sri Lanka. DATA COLLECTION Three villages in the Badulla and Moneragala districts were selectedfor a field survey on the basis of the information gatheredfrom the extension workers on the use of the common property resourcesby the villagers. A random sample of 220 farmers was selected from the three villages chosenfor the survey. Thesevillages were surrounded by the community forests and were located nearly 150-250 kilometres from each other. They were not served by public roads or transport, and community amenities, such as hospitals, and institutional facilities were relatively poor. The literacy rate (defined as the percentageof the population aged 10years and above,being able to read and write at least in one language) was nearly 15 per cent in the study area. A general school drop-out rate of 20 per cent was reported and it was even more after the fifth grade. The lack of finances, demand for family labour for farm work, outside employment and inadequacy of educational facilities were some of the factors responsible for this outcome. Farming was the dominant form of employment. CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES TO VILLAGE COMMUNITIES Nearly 21 per cent of farmers in the Badulla district irrigated their lowland paddy from the streams flowing from the village forests or
Common property
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
193
adjoining tea estates. However, such evidence was generally lacking in the villages of the Moneragala district, as it is in the dry zone, with low rainfall. This suggeststhe need for deep wells for ground water resources in this district. There are a number of anicuts for storage of rain water serving these villages, but all of them are severely damaged due to improper care and maintenance. The majority of farmers felt that restoration of these anicuts would help to conserve rain water for their farming. The number of cattle/buffalo reared by farmers is one or two in the villages of both districts. The cattle were mainly for milk production and the buffaloes for farm draught requirements. Seventytwo per cent of the farmers in Moneragala district allowed their indigenous cattle/buffalo to feed on the communal pasturesin adjoining forests, on the banks of streams, village pathways and on the bunds of lowland paddy extents. Such free grazing of cattle was evident for 42 per cent of households in Badulla district. The extent of grazing varied from 290 to 310 animal days per year in Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. The grazing in the common property resources was the only source of feeding for cattle/buffaloes for 9 or 10 months of the year in the study villages. During the harvest periods (2-3 months) they are also fed on paddy straw or allowed to graze on the paddy stubbles remaining after harvest. The averagemilk production per cow was 2245kg and 1370kg per annum in Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. This low milk production was due to the fact that less than 1 per cent of the households use concentrate feeding for lactating cows. Improving the milk industry in these villages would decreasethe extent of the protein malnutrition prevailing among preschool children in these districts. The cattle industry generated direct employment of 62 to 145 man days per household in the Badulla and Moneragala villages, respectively. Hence, such an improvement of this industry also would lead to an increase in farm revenue through additional employment. Providing an improved feeding system of concentrates to the lactating cows, and the introduction of improved pasture to the present grazing lands, would help to enhance the milk production of cows in the study villages. The pregnant cows and newly born calves are fed with cut grass, shrubs and tender leaves of trees for four or five months. The mortality rate of calves during birth was 20 per cent due to poor management and unsatisfactory sanitary conditions of the pregnant cows and newly born calves. The village forests also supply the timber requirements for household
194
C. Bogahawatte
cooking. In addition, part of the timber was sold to the urban timber suppliers. The averageincome from such earnings amounted to Rs 1475 and Rs 2015 per household per annum in the villages of Badulla and Moneragala, respectively. This accounts for nearly 11 per cent of the total income earned by the households. Although felling of trees is restricted through legal enactments of the government, clearing and felling of trees continue unhindered in the study villages. In the villages of Badulla district 17 per cent of the farmers compared to 26 per cent in Moneragala reported using the forest clearings for rotational rainfed crop cultivation. The clearing and burning of the jungle was followed by the seedingof a mixture of crops such as chillies, sesame,maize, gingelly and turmeric. None of the farmers used modern inputs such as fertilizers, weedicides or pesticides on these growing crops. The yields were relatively low and constituted 23 per cent (of Rs 3718) and 29 per cent (of Rs 4275) of the household incomes earned in the villages of Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. As the cost of growing these crops was minimal the share of profits from them was relatively high. The improvement of research and extension servicesin the growing of these rotational crops seemsto be relatively important in the study area. Most of these agricultural products were marketed outside the villages to private traders. The trade prices were 10-15 per cent lower than the open market prices for these products in Badulla and Moneragala town. Three to four per cent of the farmers in Moneragala district obtained honey from beehivesin the forests. Nearly 10 per cent of the farmers in the study villages used medicinal herbs in the community forests for the cure of mild household illnesses. Table 1 shows the extent and the type of employment of the farm households from the common property resourcesby farm size. In the villages of the Badulla and Moneragala districts the extent of employment from the common property resourceswas generally related to the farm size (except for collecting timber for household cooking), i.e. the bigger the farm the less would be the dependenceof the households on the common property resources for employment. This suggests that those farmers owning smaller farms with low cropping intensity would seek additional revenue from the common property resourcesas compared to those farmers with larger farms. The majority of the farmers owning lessthan 1ha reported higher additional revenuefrom collecting timber for selling and rotational crop production in the community
Common property
195
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
TABLE 1 Extent of Employment of the Family Household Members from Common Property Resources by Farm Size Type of employment
Percentage of households reporting in the sampled villages by farm size in Moneragala
Badulla
(n = 38)
Less than 1 ha (n = 71)
1-3 ha (n = 24)
84
9
96
16
91 45
97 6
94 64
79 11
36
13
49
9
96
43
99
51
Less than I ha
1-3 ha
(n=87) Taking cattle for grazing Collecting timber for household cooking Collecting timber for selling Cutting fodder for cattle feeding Crop production in rotational crop cultivation Collecting honey, hunting wild animals for selling (from forests)
1.6
0.3
3.4
0.4
forests as compared to other types of employment. The provision of more land for farming by land reform policies thereby may reduce the illicit felling of forest trees presently done by the farmers in the study area. DETERIORATION
OF THE COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES
The extent of common property resourceshas declined by six to seven per cent between 1981 and 1983. This was contributed to by factors such as illicit cultivation of forest resources, encroachments of the common property resources for the expansion of the cultivated area, and soil erosion due to unlimited felling of trees. The ratio of cattle/ buffalo grazing per hectarage of the common property resources was low (0.68 in all the villages). This shows the possibility of further improvement of the livestock population in these villages by breeding
C. Bogahawatte
196
programmes. The animals could then be fed from the grassesof the common property resources.However, improvements of the pasture of the common property resources is required to increase the nutritive value of the pasture available, e.g., by the addition of legumesto increase the protein value. Nearly 95 per cent of the farmers in the study villages reported that damage to the flowing streams occurs due to irregular tapping of water, silting during floods, and blocking of the water flow by branchesof treescut by the villagers during clearing of the community forests. In addition, pollution of the flowing water supply occurs due to animal and human wastes as well as the washing of animals and household utilities. There is a danger of the drying-up of these streams due to over-exploitation of forest resources. VILLAGE
MARKETS AND COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES
The saleablecommon property resourceproducts of householdsincluded honey, timber, fruits, medicinal herbs, and the produce from rotational crop cultivation. These products were directly sold at the rural markets or to the village or outside village traders. The averagedistances to the rural markets varied from 10.9 to 7-5km from the villages of Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. These village markets were usually held once or twice a week and attracted a large number of consumers and traders from the neighbouring villages seekingbargains. Nearly 61 per cent of the households in Moneragala villages sold their common property resource products at these markets compared to 27 per cent of the farmers from the villages of Badulla. Less than six per cent of the traders purchased these products directly from the farmers. These traders offered prices which were generally 10-15 per cent below the rural market prices. All the crops grown as rainfed rotational crops were sold at higher prices compared to other common property resource products. However, these prices were generally well below the price levelsmaintained at Badulla or Moneragala urban markets. For example, the highest prices offered at the farm gate for red chillies ranged from Rs 20 to 30 per kg, but they were sold in the urban markets for Rs 70 to 80 per kg. The production of the rainfed rotational crops was low (Table 2). Some crops, such as gingelly, finger millet, and red millet,
Common property
197
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
TABLE 2 Amount of Rainfed Rotational Crops Sold and Average Prices Obtained Rainfed rotational crops
Amount sold per rainfed
farm (kg) Badulla
Chillies (dried) Gingelly Cowpeas Greengram Finger millet Red millet
11 270 6 800 1920 1575 875
Average price at which the products are sold WW
Moneragala
Badulla
Moneragala
107 360 1 100 2 700 2175 970
3&32 5.10 5.25 7.70 5.00 5.00
25-30 530 4.85 7.50 4.90 5.00
were only grown as rotational crops in these districts. Hence, it would be worthwhile for the government marketing agencies,such as the Paddy Marketing Board (PMB), the Marketing Federation (MARKFED) and cooperatives,to organize a purchasing schemefor theseproducts directly from the farmers. This would encouragefarmers to increaseproduction once fair prices and a purchasing schemefor the products were ensured.
FARM INCOME AND COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES The sources and values of annual household incomes of the study villages are shown in Table 3. The total household income was composed of the income from farming, livestock, common property resources, agricultural hired labour and non-farm income (e.g. trade, teaching, government service, etc.). In Badulla villages, 17 per cent of farmers obtained an annual income of Rs 3 120from common property resources, which accounted for 22 per cent of the total household income. The household income from the common property resources in the Moneragala villages was higher (Rs 4100 per annum), and this was equivalent to 40 per cent of total income for the farmers in the villages of this district. This indicates, in general, that the common property resourcesare the means of additional revenue for the farmers. Hence, any protective measures adopted to curb the deterioration of these
198
C. Bogahawatte TABLE
3
Average Annual Income Levels from Different Sources Source of income
Bad&a Per cent farmers reporting
Farming Livestock Common property resources Agricultural labour Non-farming
(n = 125)
Average income 1 year VW
Moneragala
Per cent of total income w
Per cent farmers reporting
(n = 95)
Average income I year w
Per cent of total income w
93 42
3400 1 100
24 8
96 72
2 800 1475
28 15
17 10 34
3 120 2100 4210
22 15 30
26 6 9
4 100 510 1245
40 5 12
common property resourcesby governmental action should be followed by alternative income generating avenues for the farmers. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The erosion of the common property resourceswas evident in the study area. This was mainly attributed to the clearing of the dense forest jungles, the burning and clearing for rainfed rotational crop cultivation, and the felling of trees for timber. This destroys the natural ecology and tends to dry up the water resources used for irrigation of crops, and for drinking. This form of cultivation was practised by farmers due to their small farm size. Hence, it could be prevented by proper land reform policies in land distribution, and also by legal enactmentsin the use of these resources.The overgrazing of the communal pastures was not a serious problem due to the low cattle/buffalo population in the study area. The improvement of these pastures with better grassesand legumes would result in an increase of milk production. This also indicates the possibility of increasing the cattle/buffalo population in the villages. This would generateadditional employment opportunities and also reduce the protein malnutrition prevalent among pre-school children in the study area. The communal streams and ponds could be used for breeding fish as a source of protein in the diet of rural households, and if properly developed would enhance rural incomes.
Common property
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
199
Although the common property resources are major sources of rural household incomes, the absenceof the collective responsibility of the village community to protect such resources exists. This could be eliminated by reorganization of the village extension servicesto include the use and protection of the common property resourcesin the study area.
Administration
23 (1986) 191-199
Erosion of Common Property Resources:Evidence from Villages in the Dryzone Districts of Sri Lanka C. Bogahawatte Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, University of Peradeniya, Old Galaha Road, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka (Received: 24 June, 1985)
SUMMARY Common property resources form a major agricultural resource base in the villages of Sri Lanka, but they have deteriorated in recent years. This research study was conducted in two districts of Sri Lanka to investigate the major causes of the erosion of the common property resources. The irregular felhng of trees for timber, clearing and the burning af forests for rainfed rotational cultivation were evident in the study villages. The over-grazing of the communalpastures is not a serious problem due to the low cattle/buj.Kalo population. The income from the common property resources is signtficant in the drier districts.
INTRODUCTION The common property resourcesin a typical Sri Lankan village include community forests and pastures, rivers/river beds, streams, ponds or ground water resources,banks of village roads, and village forests. The benefits derived from thesecommon property resourcesby communities vary. For example, the community forests/village forests provide the villages with food, their fodder supply, grazing grounds for cattle and other livestock, and manure for rainfed crops. They also serve as a source of resource conservation and environment improvement. The communal pastures provide fodder supply for cattle, manure for crops, and help to conserve soil-moisture, in addition to 191
0309-586X/86/$03.50 Elsevier Applied SciencePublishers Ltd, England, 1986. Printed in Great Britain
Agricultural
Administration
192
C. Bogahawatte
their role in environment improvement and resourceconservation. The ponds/tanks/rivers and streams provide irrigation for crops, food, and water for drinking and cleaning. The river/pond banks also provide silt as a source of building material. The ground water sources, tapped in the form of deep wells, provide water for drinking and home use, irrigation of crops, soil moisture conservation, and are a form of resource conservation. The deterioration of the common property resources has been evident in the village communities due to factors such as over-exploitation, institutional changes,and government policies. This paper attempts to highlight the major contributions of the common property resources and the factors affecting the deterioration of such resourcesin the Badulla and Moneragala districts of Sri Lanka. DATA COLLECTION Three villages in the Badulla and Moneragala districts were selectedfor a field survey on the basis of the information gatheredfrom the extension workers on the use of the common property resourcesby the villagers. A random sample of 220 farmers was selected from the three villages chosenfor the survey. Thesevillages were surrounded by the community forests and were located nearly 150-250 kilometres from each other. They were not served by public roads or transport, and community amenities, such as hospitals, and institutional facilities were relatively poor. The literacy rate (defined as the percentageof the population aged 10years and above,being able to read and write at least in one language) was nearly 15 per cent in the study area. A general school drop-out rate of 20 per cent was reported and it was even more after the fifth grade. The lack of finances, demand for family labour for farm work, outside employment and inadequacy of educational facilities were some of the factors responsible for this outcome. Farming was the dominant form of employment. CONTRIBUTIONS OF COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES TO VILLAGE COMMUNITIES Nearly 21 per cent of farmers in the Badulla district irrigated their lowland paddy from the streams flowing from the village forests or
Common property
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
193
adjoining tea estates. However, such evidence was generally lacking in the villages of the Moneragala district, as it is in the dry zone, with low rainfall. This suggeststhe need for deep wells for ground water resources in this district. There are a number of anicuts for storage of rain water serving these villages, but all of them are severely damaged due to improper care and maintenance. The majority of farmers felt that restoration of these anicuts would help to conserve rain water for their farming. The number of cattle/buffalo reared by farmers is one or two in the villages of both districts. The cattle were mainly for milk production and the buffaloes for farm draught requirements. Seventytwo per cent of the farmers in Moneragala district allowed their indigenous cattle/buffalo to feed on the communal pasturesin adjoining forests, on the banks of streams, village pathways and on the bunds of lowland paddy extents. Such free grazing of cattle was evident for 42 per cent of households in Badulla district. The extent of grazing varied from 290 to 310 animal days per year in Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. The grazing in the common property resources was the only source of feeding for cattle/buffaloes for 9 or 10 months of the year in the study villages. During the harvest periods (2-3 months) they are also fed on paddy straw or allowed to graze on the paddy stubbles remaining after harvest. The averagemilk production per cow was 2245kg and 1370kg per annum in Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. This low milk production was due to the fact that less than 1 per cent of the households use concentrate feeding for lactating cows. Improving the milk industry in these villages would decreasethe extent of the protein malnutrition prevailing among preschool children in these districts. The cattle industry generated direct employment of 62 to 145 man days per household in the Badulla and Moneragala villages, respectively. Hence, such an improvement of this industry also would lead to an increase in farm revenue through additional employment. Providing an improved feeding system of concentrates to the lactating cows, and the introduction of improved pasture to the present grazing lands, would help to enhance the milk production of cows in the study villages. The pregnant cows and newly born calves are fed with cut grass, shrubs and tender leaves of trees for four or five months. The mortality rate of calves during birth was 20 per cent due to poor management and unsatisfactory sanitary conditions of the pregnant cows and newly born calves. The village forests also supply the timber requirements for household
194
C. Bogahawatte
cooking. In addition, part of the timber was sold to the urban timber suppliers. The averageincome from such earnings amounted to Rs 1475 and Rs 2015 per household per annum in the villages of Badulla and Moneragala, respectively. This accounts for nearly 11 per cent of the total income earned by the households. Although felling of trees is restricted through legal enactments of the government, clearing and felling of trees continue unhindered in the study villages. In the villages of Badulla district 17 per cent of the farmers compared to 26 per cent in Moneragala reported using the forest clearings for rotational rainfed crop cultivation. The clearing and burning of the jungle was followed by the seedingof a mixture of crops such as chillies, sesame,maize, gingelly and turmeric. None of the farmers used modern inputs such as fertilizers, weedicides or pesticides on these growing crops. The yields were relatively low and constituted 23 per cent (of Rs 3718) and 29 per cent (of Rs 4275) of the household incomes earned in the villages of Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. As the cost of growing these crops was minimal the share of profits from them was relatively high. The improvement of research and extension servicesin the growing of these rotational crops seemsto be relatively important in the study area. Most of these agricultural products were marketed outside the villages to private traders. The trade prices were 10-15 per cent lower than the open market prices for these products in Badulla and Moneragala town. Three to four per cent of the farmers in Moneragala district obtained honey from beehivesin the forests. Nearly 10 per cent of the farmers in the study villages used medicinal herbs in the community forests for the cure of mild household illnesses. Table 1 shows the extent and the type of employment of the farm households from the common property resourcesby farm size. In the villages of the Badulla and Moneragala districts the extent of employment from the common property resourceswas generally related to the farm size (except for collecting timber for household cooking), i.e. the bigger the farm the less would be the dependenceof the households on the common property resources for employment. This suggests that those farmers owning smaller farms with low cropping intensity would seek additional revenue from the common property resourcesas compared to those farmers with larger farms. The majority of the farmers owning lessthan 1ha reported higher additional revenuefrom collecting timber for selling and rotational crop production in the community
Common property
195
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
TABLE 1 Extent of Employment of the Family Household Members from Common Property Resources by Farm Size Type of employment
Percentage of households reporting in the sampled villages by farm size in Moneragala
Badulla
(n = 38)
Less than 1 ha (n = 71)
1-3 ha (n = 24)
84
9
96
16
91 45
97 6
94 64
79 11
36
13
49
9
96
43
99
51
Less than I ha
1-3 ha
(n=87) Taking cattle for grazing Collecting timber for household cooking Collecting timber for selling Cutting fodder for cattle feeding Crop production in rotational crop cultivation Collecting honey, hunting wild animals for selling (from forests)
1.6
0.3
3.4
0.4
forests as compared to other types of employment. The provision of more land for farming by land reform policies thereby may reduce the illicit felling of forest trees presently done by the farmers in the study area. DETERIORATION
OF THE COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES
The extent of common property resourceshas declined by six to seven per cent between 1981 and 1983. This was contributed to by factors such as illicit cultivation of forest resources, encroachments of the common property resources for the expansion of the cultivated area, and soil erosion due to unlimited felling of trees. The ratio of cattle/ buffalo grazing per hectarage of the common property resources was low (0.68 in all the villages). This shows the possibility of further improvement of the livestock population in these villages by breeding
C. Bogahawatte
196
programmes. The animals could then be fed from the grassesof the common property resources.However, improvements of the pasture of the common property resources is required to increase the nutritive value of the pasture available, e.g., by the addition of legumesto increase the protein value. Nearly 95 per cent of the farmers in the study villages reported that damage to the flowing streams occurs due to irregular tapping of water, silting during floods, and blocking of the water flow by branchesof treescut by the villagers during clearing of the community forests. In addition, pollution of the flowing water supply occurs due to animal and human wastes as well as the washing of animals and household utilities. There is a danger of the drying-up of these streams due to over-exploitation of forest resources. VILLAGE
MARKETS AND COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES
The saleablecommon property resourceproducts of householdsincluded honey, timber, fruits, medicinal herbs, and the produce from rotational crop cultivation. These products were directly sold at the rural markets or to the village or outside village traders. The averagedistances to the rural markets varied from 10.9 to 7-5km from the villages of Badulla and Moneragala districts, respectively. These village markets were usually held once or twice a week and attracted a large number of consumers and traders from the neighbouring villages seekingbargains. Nearly 61 per cent of the households in Moneragala villages sold their common property resource products at these markets compared to 27 per cent of the farmers from the villages of Badulla. Less than six per cent of the traders purchased these products directly from the farmers. These traders offered prices which were generally 10-15 per cent below the rural market prices. All the crops grown as rainfed rotational crops were sold at higher prices compared to other common property resource products. However, these prices were generally well below the price levelsmaintained at Badulla or Moneragala urban markets. For example, the highest prices offered at the farm gate for red chillies ranged from Rs 20 to 30 per kg, but they were sold in the urban markets for Rs 70 to 80 per kg. The production of the rainfed rotational crops was low (Table 2). Some crops, such as gingelly, finger millet, and red millet,
Common property
197
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
TABLE 2 Amount of Rainfed Rotational Crops Sold and Average Prices Obtained Rainfed rotational crops
Amount sold per rainfed
farm (kg) Badulla
Chillies (dried) Gingelly Cowpeas Greengram Finger millet Red millet
11 270 6 800 1920 1575 875
Average price at which the products are sold WW
Moneragala
Badulla
Moneragala
107 360 1 100 2 700 2175 970
3&32 5.10 5.25 7.70 5.00 5.00
25-30 530 4.85 7.50 4.90 5.00
were only grown as rotational crops in these districts. Hence, it would be worthwhile for the government marketing agencies,such as the Paddy Marketing Board (PMB), the Marketing Federation (MARKFED) and cooperatives,to organize a purchasing schemefor theseproducts directly from the farmers. This would encouragefarmers to increaseproduction once fair prices and a purchasing schemefor the products were ensured.
FARM INCOME AND COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES The sources and values of annual household incomes of the study villages are shown in Table 3. The total household income was composed of the income from farming, livestock, common property resources, agricultural hired labour and non-farm income (e.g. trade, teaching, government service, etc.). In Badulla villages, 17 per cent of farmers obtained an annual income of Rs 3 120from common property resources, which accounted for 22 per cent of the total household income. The household income from the common property resources in the Moneragala villages was higher (Rs 4100 per annum), and this was equivalent to 40 per cent of total income for the farmers in the villages of this district. This indicates, in general, that the common property resourcesare the means of additional revenue for the farmers. Hence, any protective measures adopted to curb the deterioration of these
198
C. Bogahawatte TABLE
3
Average Annual Income Levels from Different Sources Source of income
Bad&a Per cent farmers reporting
Farming Livestock Common property resources Agricultural labour Non-farming
(n = 125)
Average income 1 year VW
Moneragala
Per cent of total income w
Per cent farmers reporting
(n = 95)
Average income I year w
Per cent of total income w
93 42
3400 1 100
24 8
96 72
2 800 1475
28 15
17 10 34
3 120 2100 4210
22 15 30
26 6 9
4 100 510 1245
40 5 12
common property resourcesby governmental action should be followed by alternative income generating avenues for the farmers. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The erosion of the common property resourceswas evident in the study area. This was mainly attributed to the clearing of the dense forest jungles, the burning and clearing for rainfed rotational crop cultivation, and the felling of trees for timber. This destroys the natural ecology and tends to dry up the water resources used for irrigation of crops, and for drinking. This form of cultivation was practised by farmers due to their small farm size. Hence, it could be prevented by proper land reform policies in land distribution, and also by legal enactmentsin the use of these resources.The overgrazing of the communal pastures was not a serious problem due to the low cattle/buffalo population in the study area. The improvement of these pastures with better grassesand legumes would result in an increase of milk production. This also indicates the possibility of increasing the cattle/buffalo population in the villages. This would generateadditional employment opportunities and also reduce the protein malnutrition prevalent among pre-school children in the study area. The communal streams and ponds could be used for breeding fish as a source of protein in the diet of rural households, and if properly developed would enhance rural incomes.
Common property
resources erosion in Sri Lanka
199
Although the common property resources are major sources of rural household incomes, the absenceof the collective responsibility of the village community to protect such resources exists. This could be eliminated by reorganization of the village extension servicesto include the use and protection of the common property resourcesin the study area.