Abstract
Women are important stakeholders in natural resource policies since rural women in developing countries are responsible for most of the collection of food, fuel, and firewood for commercial and domestic use. When it comes to the management of these natural resources, gender inequality due to societal traditions could limit the ability of women to participate in policy-making, even when they are not formally excluded. This paper analyzes the effect of gender stratification on women's participation by undertaking an empirical study of a participatory environmental policy program in Indian villages. It endeavors to answer the question of how gender stratification affects participatory environmental policy-making. Using the case study of a community forestry program, it finds that women are still marginalized in decision-making, even in participatory environmental policies. Gender stratification continues to impinge upon forms of democratic decision-making in developing societies. Using facilitating policy tools that seek to empower such marginalized groups would be one way of making participation meaningful for all groups in society.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Agrawal, A. (1994). Small is beautiful, but could larger be better? A comparative analysis of five village forest institutions in the Indian Middle Himalayas. Paper presented to the FAO Forestry Working Group on Common Property, Oxford Forestry Institute, Oxford, UK.
Agrawal, A., and Gibson, C. (eds.). (2001). Communities and Nature: Ethnicity, Gender, and the State in Community-Based Conservation, Rutgers University Press, Piscataway, NJ.
Agarwal, B. (1992). The gender and environment debate: Lessons from India. Feminist Studies 18(1): 119–156.
Agarwal, B. (2000). Conceptualizing environmental collective action: Why gender matters. Cambridge Journal of Economics 24(3): 283–310.
Barber, B. (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Basu, A. (1992). Two Faces of Protest: Contrasting Modes of Women's Activism in India, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Bhatt, Y., and Banerjee, M. (1999). We are the government in our village: Tribals' struggle for local governance. Availalbe from www.ids.ac.uk/ids/civsoc
Brewer, G., and DeLeon, P. (1983). The Foundation of Policy Analysis, Dorsey Press, Illinois.
Cornwall, A. (2000). Making a Difference? Gender and Participatory Development, UNRISD, Geneva.
DeLeon, P. (1992). The democratization of the policy science. Public Administration Review 52: 125–129.
Desai, N., and Krishnaraj, M. (1987). Women and Society in India. Ajanta, Delhi.
Dryzek, J. (1990). Discursive Democracy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Dryzek, J. (1997). The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, Oxford University Press, New York.
Fishkin, J. (1991). Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Gadgil, M., and Guha, R. (1995). Ecology and Equity: The Use and Abuse of Nature in Contemporary India, Routledge, London.
Ghate, R. (2000). Joint Forest Management: Constituting new commons. Paper presented at the Eighth Conference of the IASCP, Bloomington, IN.
Hayward, B. (1995). The greening of participatory democracy: A reconsideration of theory. Environmental Politics 4: 215–235.
Jackson, C. (1993). Environmentalisms and gender interests in the Third World. Development and Change 24(4): 649–671.
Jain, D. (1996). Panchayat Raj: Women Changing Governance. www.undp.org/gender/resources/mono5.html.
Jejeebhoy, S. (2000). Women's autonomy in rural India: Its dimensions, determinants, and the influence of context. In Presser, H., and Sen, G. (eds.), Women's Empowerment and Demographic Processes, Oxford University Press, New York.
Kann, M. (1986). Environmental democracy in the United States. In Kamieniecki, S., O'Brien, R., and Clarke, M. (eds.), Controversies in Environmental Policy, SUNY Press, New York.
Kothari, A., Pathak, N., Anuradha, R. V., and Taneja, B. (eds.) (1998). Communities and Con-servation: Natural Resource Management in South and Central Asia Sage, New Delhi.
Mansbridge, J. (1980). Beyond Adversary Democracy, Basic Books, New York.
Ministry of Environment and Forests (1990). Circular on involvement of village communities and voluntary agencies for regeneration of degraded forest lands, MoEF No. 6–21/89-F.P.
Ministry of Environment and Forests (2002). Joint Forest Management: ADecade of Partnership, Government of India, New Delhi.
Morrell, M. (1999). Citizen's evaluations of participatory democratic procedures: Normative theory meets empirical science. Political Research Quarterly 52(2): 293–322.
Murali, K. S., Sharma, M., Jagannatha Rao, R., Murthy, I. K., and Ravindranath, N. H. (2000). Status of participatory forest management in India: An analysis. In Ravindranath, N. H., Murali, K. S., and Malhotra, K. C. (eds.), Joint Forest Management and Community Forestry in India: An Ecological and Institutional Assessment, Oxford and India Book House, New Delhi, pp. 25–58.
Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and Democratic Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Pathak, N. (2000). Joint Forest Management and Gender: Women's Participation and Benefit-Sharing in JFM in India, Unpublished paper, Adithi and Kalpavriksh.
Przeworski, A., and Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry, Wiley-Interscience, New York.
Ravindranath, N. H., and Sudha, P. (2000). The need for assessment of self-initiated community and Joint Forest Management systems in India. In Ravindranath, N. H., Murali, K. S., and Malhotra, K. C. (eds.), Joint Forest Management and Community Forestry in India: An Ecological and Institutional Assessment, Oxford and India Book House, New Delhi, pp. 1–24.
Sarin, M. (1996). Joint Forest Management: The Haryana Experience, Centre for Environment Education, Ahmedabad, India.
Sarin, M. (1998). Who is Gaining? Who is Losing? Gender and Equity Concerns in Joint Forest Management, Working Paper, Society for the Promotion of Wastelands Development, New Delhi.
Skocpol, T., and Somers, M. (1980). The uses of comparative history in macrosocial inquiry. Comparative Studies in Society and History 22: 174–197.
Subramaniam, M., Gupte, M., and Mitra, D. (2002). Organizing across the local, national and international level by creating transnational spaces: Evidence from India. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Sociology Association, Chicago, IL, August 19–22.
Sundar, N., and Jeffery, R. (1999). Introduction. In Jeffery, R., and Sundar, N. (eds.), A New Moral Economy for India's forests?: Discourses of Community and Participation, Sage New Delhi, pp. 15–54.
Sundar, N., Jeffrey, R., and Thin, N. (2001). Branching Out: Joint Forest Management in India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
Thompson, J. (1995). Participatory approaches in government bureaucracies: Facilitating the process of institutional change. World Development 23(9): 1521–1554.
Vidyarthi, L., and Rai, B. (2000). The Tribal Culture of India, Concept Publishing, New Delhi.
Weaver, M. A. (2000). Gandi's daughters: India's poorest women embark on an epic social experiment. The New Yorker 75(41): 50–61.
Yin, R. (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gupte, M. Participation in a Gendered Environment: The Case of Community Forestry in India. Human Ecology 32, 365–382 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HUEC.0000028086.63366.3d
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HUEC.0000028086.63366.3d