Her Work and its Contribution to tHe tHeory and PraCtiCe of Conservation and sustainable natural resourCe ManageMent Policy Matters iuCn CoMMission on environMental, eConoMiC and soCial PoliCy issue 19 aPril 2014

POLICY MATTERS 2014: REMEMBERING ELINOR OSTROM

14

at The Workshop in Political Theory and 

Policy Analysis at Indiana University initiated 

the International Forestry Resources and 

Institutions (IFRI) program, which would 

provide over-time data on peopled forests 

to link information on socio-economic, 

institutional and ecological aspects. Now 

active in a number of countries across multiple 

continents, IFRI was founded and tested using 

a small set of sites that included locations 

in India and Nepal, and continues to contain 

active programs in these two countries. 

Research from IFRI locations in India has been 

fundamental in demonstrating the importance 

of self-governance and local monitoring for 

the sustainable management of community 

forests in critical wildlife habitats in central 

India (Ghate 2004; Ostrom and Nagendra 

2006; Ghate, Ghate and Ostrom 2013) and 

the eastern Himalayas (Agrawal and Chhatre 

2006). Local monitoring, sanctioning and 

enforcement of rules seem to be important 

predictors of forest condition in several 

IFRI studies (Ghate and Nagendra 2006).  A 

complete reliance on government monitoring 

through forest guards is difficult in the Indian 

context, where guards have to cover large 

areas, are lightly armed, and have to deal with 

social challenges that make it difficult for 

them to enforce rules. In fact, as Agrawal and 

Chhatre (2006) conclude from IFRI studies in 

India and elsewhere, government involvement 

may be negatively associated with forest 

condition in some contexts, while community 

managed forests may be better suited to cater 

to local needs (Agrawal and Chhatre 2006; 

Chhatre and Agrawal 2008).Thus, warning 

against a mis-interpretation of the need for 

monitoring, Ostrom and Nagendra (2006, 

19230-19231) stated that “We do not advocate 

using fences and guns to protect government 

forests… Unless one ensures the livelihoods 

of those living around or within a forest, a 

major investment in monitoring alone is not a 

sufficient, long-run management strategy and 

may even be counterproductive”.

Through a careful examination of forest 

change in the Tadoba Andhari Tiger Reserve 

in Maharashtra, the Mahananda Wildlife 

Sanctuary in West Bengal, and the Chitwan 

National Park in Nepal, Ostrom and Nagendra 

(2006) found that the official designation 

Plate 1: Elinor Ostrom at a community forest group meeting organized by the Foundation for Ecological 

Security in Karnataka State, India, in February 2012 (Photo credit: Harini Nagendra)

---

POLICY MATTERS 2014: REMEMBERING ELINOR OSTROM

15

of a forest as government, community, or 

co-managed did not appear to impact forest 

conservation as much as the legitimacy of 

ownership and degree of local monitoring. 

Corroborating this, data from 42 forests in 

multiple countries established that the type 

of ownership did not have a statistically 

significant impact on forest quality as 

measured using assessments of tree density 

or tree size. What emerged as most significant 

was the involvement of communities in 

regular monitoring, with this study concluding 

that “when users are genuinely engaged in 

decisions regarding rules affecting their use, 

the likelihood of them following the rules and 

monitoring others is much greater than when 

an authority simply imposes rules.” (Ostrom 

and Nagendra 2006, 19224). Local forest users 

can also provide reliable, low cost assessments 

of changes in forest density that can be 

significant inputs for monitoring ecological 

change (Nagendra and Ostrom 2011).

The research of Ostrom and colleagues holds 

great significance for Indian forest policy, in 

particular to the discussions of the Scheduled 

Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers 

(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act (FRA) 

of 2006, which provides traditional forest 

dwellers with rights over forest land that 

is customarily used and managed by them. 

Presently, debates around implementation 

of the FRA are centred on questions such 

as: Are communities capable of monitoring 

and managing such a valuable resource? 

Will the transfer of authority result in large-

scale deforestation? Are traditional norms of 

sustainable harvesting and equitable benefit 

sharing effective in traditional communities? 

FIELD EXPERIMENTS IN INDIGENOUS 

INDIAN COMMUNITIES

Generally assumed in these discussions 

is the fact that access to markets and 

commercialisation has affected local 

communities’ attitudes and behaviour 

regarding forests, making them less inclined 

to cooperate, and more likely to engage in 

destructive practices of over-harvesting. 

Ostrom and her colleagues examined this issue 

in detail using field experiments conducted 

in predominantly tribal communities in the 

Indian State of Maharashtra. From eight 

experiments conducted in four forest/tribal 

rich areas of the state, Ghate, Ghate and 

Ostrom (forthcoming) found that communities 

that have had strong previous traditions of 

shared norms and mutual trust tend to be non-

exploitative, non-commercial, and cooperate 

towards prioritising, planning, and sustainably 

managing forest resources. Thus, human 

beings are not always “Homo economicus”, 

they can be “Homo reciprocans” and even 

“Homo cooperatus”

 in the case of common-

pool resources. The study confirms Ostrom’s 

(1998) observation that it is also possible for 

individuals to achieve results that are “better 

than rational” in certain conditions. 

Another study that used evolving field 

experiments (Ghate, Ghate and Ostrom 

2013) indicates that indigenous communities 

can be trusted with forest management 

responsibilities, and policies such as Joint 

Forest Management (JFM) and the FRA are 

moving in the right direction. In one of the 

experiments, participants adopted plantations 

of fast-growing trees for fuel wood and fodder, 

which, they argued, helped them protect 

high-value timber trees. It was also clear by 

their behaviour during the experiments that 

communities are able to address the issue 

of equity while sharing the benefits from 

collective forest protections measures. The 

study concludes that if forests collectively 

managed by communities are not degraded 

below the critical minimum, communities 

are capable of successfully protecting and 

regenerating the resource. However, at least in 

the initial period, some failures of community 

management should not be generalized, 

because “once altruist and reciprocal 

motivations are crowded out, it takes some 

time to re-establish trust and reciprocity” 

(Vollan 2008: 563).

RESEARCH ON URBAN INDIAN 

COMMONS 

 

Ostrom argued it was time to really pay 

attention to urban commons. The Social-

Ecological Systems (SES) Framework she 

developed provides a useful common 

---