1. KAUTIR (Kerala Agricultural University Theses Information and Retrieval)

Permanent URI for this communityhttp://localhost:4000/handle/123456789/1

Browse

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Performance effectiveness of biodiversity management at gramapanchayats in Kerala
    (Department of Agricultural Extension Education, College of Agriculture , Vellayani, 2024-03-11) Rehma, A Victor.; 1. Anil Kumar, A
    The study entitled ‘Performance effectiveness of biodiversity management at Grama Panchayats in Kerala’ was conducted from 2019 to 2023. The primary objectives were to study the performance effectiveness of Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC) at Grama Panchayat level in Kerala, Socio- political dynamics in biodiversity management and perception of BMC members and other stakeholders on depletion of natural resources. Constraints experienced by the BMCs in implementing biodiversity conservation were also studied. Historical documentation of environmental movements for biodiversity conservation in Kerala was also undertaken. Based on the biodiversity richness and ecological sensitivity four blocks each were selected purposively from low lands of Kannur and Alappuzha districts, mid lands of Kollam and Malappuram districts and high ranges of Wayanad and Idukki districts of Kerala. Thus, a total number of 12 blocks were identified for the study. From each block 5 Panchayats were selected randomly. Therefore, a total number of 60 Panchayats were selected for the study. BMC members and other stakeholders comprised the respondent categories. From each Panchayat selected, 3 BMC members each were identified randomly. Hence, 15 BMC members were selected from each block. Thus 60 BMC members each were selected from low lands, mid lands and high ranges. Therefore, a total of 180 BMC members were selected from the 6 districts for the study purpose. In the other stakeholder respondent category, a minimum of 5 each were ensured from the traders, social activists, general public, farmers and officials of departments concerned with biodiversity. Twenty-five other stakeholders from the above categories were selected from each block. Thus 100 stakeholders each were selected from low lands, mid lands and high ranges. Therefore, a total of 300 other stakeholders were selected from the 6 districts for the study purpose. Thus, a total of 480 respondents comprising of BMC members and other stakeholders were selected for the study. The relationship between twelve independent variables with performance effectiveness of BMC Members was worked out and it was found that ten out of twelve independent variables were positively and significantly correlated. The variables that had positive and significant correlation were gender (0.312), education (0.278), environmental concern (0.388), self-confidence (0.343), leadership (0.210), perception of workload (0.225), decision making ability (0.351), political orientation (0.236), participation efficiency (0.518) and environmental awareness (0.271) at 1 per cent level of significance. Education (0.312), environmental concern (0.369), self-confidence (0.196), leadership (0.296), decision making ability (0.327), political orientation (0.200), participation efficiency (0.263) and environmental awareness (0.231) of BMC members had positive and significant correlation (1%) with their perception of depletion of natural resources. The major constraints experienced by the BMCs in implementing biodiversity conservation were lack of interest of members in BMC activities, PBR preparation was considered as one time task by many BMCs who do not take efforts to update the information, public are not aware of activities of BMC, PBR preparation its timely updation and development of an electronic database of PBR is an enormous task, BMC members them self were not aware of the activities to be carried out by BMC, training programmes was not properly designed for elected representatives and officials of local governments. The environmental movements for biodiversity conservation in Kerala were Silent Valley movement (1973), Save Chaliyar Movement (1974), Mullaperiyar Dam Movement (1979), Kallen Pokkudan Movement (1989), Movement against Endosulfan (2000), Plachimada Coca-Cola Movement (2000), Muthanga Adivasi Movement to Recover Land (2003), Thottapally anti-mining movement (2003), Panamaram Airport Movement (2013), Aranmula Greenfield Airport Movement (2014), Ayiravallipara environmental movement (2022) Suggestions that can be put forward for improving the performance effectiveness of BMCs includes, provide regular trainings and handholding support to BMC members, conduct awareness programs and campaigns to educate the community about the importance of biodiversity conservation and existence of an institutional mechanism for implementing the same, timely and systematic updation of PBR should be done. All the BMCs should take effort to complete e-PBR, undertake comprehensive biodiversity surveys and assessments to understand the local flora and fauna, develop a database to document the biodiversity in the area, including threatened and endangered species, regular evaluation of BMC performance and seeking feedback from community members, provision of incentives or recognition to individuals or groups that contribute significantly to biodiversity conservation efforts, ensuring that BMC activities are sustainable and continue beyond the tenure of individual committee members. BMC activities should be made mandatory and strictly followed up by Kerala State Biodiversity Board, BMC meetings should be conducted regularly and registers has to be maintained systematically and constitution of BMC should be strictly based on as per Kerala Biological Diversity Rules 2008, Section 22 Sub Section (4) and should not be based on any kind of nepotism, staff strength of KSBB at the district co-ordination level has to be increase for strictly monitoring the activities of BMCs at the district level.