Vol: 4, Issue: 1 2014

Page: 52-61

Income & Employment Gains from Commons: An Empirical Investigation

A.R.Kulkarni

Received Date: 2014-01-09

Accepted Date: 2014-02-11

Published Date: 2014-03-12

This paper is based on the study of common property resources (CPRs) in eleven villages in Dharwad district in Karnataka. The study highlights the importance of CPRs in providing employment and income to the rural households, especially weaker sections of the society. It shows that on an average about `11 percentage of households depended on CPRs for employment. On an average male member got 38 days of employment whereas women members got only 32 days of employment. The CPRs generated Rs. 1752 per household (i.e. around 11 percent of total income) during the year 1999-00. The Gini coefficient for income from private property resources (PPRs) is 0.47 and Gini coefficient for total income (i.e. income from PPRs and income from CPRs) is 0.46. This shows that the CPR income has not helped to reduce rural inequalities created by PPRs. CPRs were the major source of employment and income for most of the households in selected villages. With depletion and degradation of CPRs, households find it difficult to get adequate and gainful employment on CPRs. Now, people are forced to seek other means of livelihood like working as daily wage laborers. In the absence of wage labor they remain idle. The depletion of CPRs has been adversely affected weaker sections of the society. The adversity of depletion is more on women than male.

References

• Agro Climatic Regional Planning Unit (1991): “Agro Climatic Regional Planning at State Level” ACRPU, Ahamadabad
• Agarwal, Bina (1986): “Cold Hearths and Barren Slopes” Allied Publishers, New Delhi.
• Beck, Tony (1994): “Common Property Resource Access by Poor and Class Conflict in West Bengal” Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.29, No.4, Pp-187-198.
• Beck, Tony and Ghosh, Madan G (2000): “Common Property Resources and the Poor- Findings from West Bengal” Economic and Political Weekly, January, 15, Pp. 147-153.
• Beck, Tony and Nesmith Cathy (1999): “Building on Poor People’s Capacities: The Case of Common Property Resources in India and West Africa” Paper presented at a World Bank Conference on “Poverty, Environment, Growth Linkages” Washington DC, 24-25th March 1999.
• Bhagavan, M R and Giriappa, S (1987): “Class Character of Rural Energy Crisis- Case of Karnataka” Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.22, No.26, Pp-A-57-69.
• Bokil, Milind S (1996): “Privatisation of Commons for the Poor- Emergence of New Agrarian Issues” Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.31, No.33, Pp.2254-2260.
• Damodaran, A (1987): “Structural Dimensions of Fodder Crisis: A Village Study in Karnataka” Economic and Political Weekly (Review of agriculture), Vol.22, No.26, Pp. A-16-22
• Ghate, Rucha S (1992): “Forest Policy and Tribal Development” Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi.
• Iyengar, Sudarshan (1989): “Common Property Land Resources in Gujarat: Some Findings about their Size, Status and Use” Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.24, No.25, Pp. A-67.
• Jodha, N S (1990): “Rural CPRs: Contributes and Crisis “Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.25, No.26, Pp. A-65.
• John, Soussan (1988): “Primary Resources and Energy in the Third World” Routledge, London, Pp. 58-107.
• Kumar, Suresh (2000): “Common Property, Community Interests and Environmental Concerns” Manak Publishers, New Delhi.
• Maggs, Philip and Hoddinott, John (1997): “The Impact of Changes in Common Property Resource Management on Intra-household Allocation” Food consumption and nutrition division of the international food policy research institute, Discussion paper-34. (Internet)
• Pasha, Syed Ajmal (1992): “CPRs and Rural Poor- A Micro Level Analysis” Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.27, No.46, Pp. 2499-2503.
• Swanson, Timothy M, Ed (1996): “The Economics of Environmental Degradation-Tragedy for the Commons?” UNEP, Edward Elgar Publishing Company, Cheltenham, UK. Brookfield, US.
• United Nations (1996): “Rural Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific” United Nations, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Pp. 11-12 and 54-66