NTFP and Tribal Livelihood in Odisha: Navigating a Changing Paradigm
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25175/jrd/2025/v44/i3/174149Keywords:
tribe, NTFPs, economy, value addition, livelihood, marketingAbstract
Tribals are the primitive and aboriginal people, primarily living in hilly/forest regions and closely interacting with nature. As a country, India has 735 types of ST communities, which account for 8.6 per cent of the population. Odisha is home to 64 ST communities, making it the largest state with a 22.85 per cent share of the ST population. Forest dwellers (ST) have traditionally closely entwined their society, culture, livelihood, and economy with the forest and natural resources. The STs gather NTFPs, such as food, fruits, roots, berries, nuts, spinach, mushrooms, firewood, medicine, household equipment, and agricultural implements, from the forest for their daily needs. Over time, it has been observed that, in addition to domestic use, gatherer households commercialise NTFPs to generate income, which is influenced by availability, demand, and supply. Additionally, people who view NTFPs as a livelihood and source of income use them to add value to the products they collect, thereby increasing income. However, the effects of modernisation, industrialisation, market economy, population explosion, infrastructure development in tribal regions, climate change, and environmental degradation have significantly impacted forest resources, leading to a decline in the availability of NTFPs. As a result, the age-old livelihood and occupation of ST have undergone a shift, resulting in migration to urban areas for remittance, working in industry, wage labour, and agricultural labour. To verify this changing paradigm, a primary survey was conducted in the Kandhamal district of Odisha, involving 396 households across eight villages in four forest ranges. Data were collected using a structured interview schedule, supported by FGDs, KIIs, and observations. The study found that NTFPs continue to contribute significantly to tribal livelihoods, especially for low- and middle-income households. However, livelihood options and processes have changed due to modernisation, industrialisation, and the market economy. Social, demographic, cultural, environmental, and climate change impacts have reduced NTFPs vis-à-vis forests, shifting livelihoods toward remittance income, wage labour, and industrial work, which now play a crucial role in tribal livelihoods
Downloads
References
1. Acharya, G. R., Koirala, P. N., Neupane, L., & Devkota, S. C. (2009). Livelihood option from minor forest produce: Context of non-timber forest product and poverty reduction in mid hills of Nepal. Journal of Wetlands Ecology, 57–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3126/jowe.v2i1.1858
2. Bisai, S., Saha, K. B., Sharma, R. K., Muniyandi, M., & Singh, N. (2014). An overview of tribal population of India. Tribal Health Bulletin, 20(Special Issue).
3. Census of India. (2011). Primary census abstract. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011
4. Economic Survey of India. (2022). Economic survey 2021–22. Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.
5. Hegde, R., Suryaprakash, S., Achoth, L., & Bawa, K. S. (1996). Extraction of non-timber forest products in the forests of Biligiri Rangan Hills, India: Contribution to rural income. Economic Botany, 50, 243–251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02907328
6. Forest Survey of India. (2021). India state of forest report 2021. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India.
7. Islam, M. A., Quli, S. M. S., Sofi, P. A., Bhat, G. M., & Malik, A. R. (2015). Livelihood dependency of indigenous people on forest in Jharkhand, India. Vegetos, 28(3), 106–118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5958/2229-4473.2015.00074.9
8. Lepcha, L. D., Gopal, S., Nazir, A. P., Vineeta, Pal, P. K., & Chakravarty, S. (2019). Contribution of NTFPs on livelihood of forest-fringe communities in Jaldapara National Park, India. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 38(3), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2018.1528158 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2018.1528158
9. Maithani, G. P. (1994). Management perspectives of minor forest produce. MFP News.
10. McMahon, G. (2014). Mineral can boost well-beings in developing countries. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.
11. Mishra, P. P. (2009). Coal mining and rural livelihoods: Case of the Ib Valley Coalfield, Orissa. Economic and Political Weekly, 44(44), 117–123.
12. Mishra, S. N., Mishra, S., Basu, R., Ankhila, R. H., Rath, S. S., Behera, P., & Nandy, A. (2023). Changing dependence of tribal communities on forests for food and livelihood in Kandhamala District of Odisha. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78(3), 400–409. DOI: https://doi.org/10.63040/25827510.2023.03.006
13. Mosse, D., et al. (2010). Brokered livelihoods: Debt, labour migration and development in tribal western India. Journal of Development Studies, 38(5), 58–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380412331322511
14. NITI Aayog. (2021). National multidimensional poverty index. National Institution for Transforming India, Government of India.
15. Pandey, A. K., Tripathi, Y. C., & Kumar, A. (2016). Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) for sustained livelihood: Challenges and strategies. Research Journal of Forestry, 10(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3923/rjf.2016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3923/rjf.2016.1.7
16. Power, K. V., & Rothkar, R. (2015). Forest conservation and environmental awareness. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science, 11, 212–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeps.2015.06.027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeps.2015.06.027
17. Shaanker, R. U., Ganeshaiah, K. N., Krishnan, S., Ramya, R., Meera, C., Aravind, N. A., Kumar, A., Rao, D., Vanaraj, G., Ramachandra, J., Gauthier, R., Ghazoul, J., Poole, N., & Reddy, B. V. C. (2004). Livelihood gains and ecological costs of non-timber forest product dependence: Assessing the roles of dependence, ecological knowledge, and market structure in three contrasting human and ecological settings in South India. Environmental Conservation, 31(3), 242–253. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892904001596
18. Tribal Development Co-operative Corporation of Odisha Ltd. (2022). Annual report 2022: Minor forest produce on minimum support price (MSP).
19. Verma, S. K., & Poul, S. K. (2019). Sustaining the non-timber forest products (NTFPs) based rural livelihoods of tribals in Jharkhand: Issues and challenges.
