You are on page 1of 11

Int. J. Environment and Sustainable Development, Vol. 5, No.

1, 2006

An ecological assessment of greening of Aravali


mountain range through joint forest management
in Rajasthan, India
Ashish Aggarwal*, Radhey Shyam Sharma,
Bhimraj Suthar and Kailash Kunwar
Seva Mandir, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India
E-mail: enviroashish@yahoo.co.in
E-mail: nrd@sevamandir.org
*Corresponding author
Abstract: Rajasthan is one of the largest Indian states with about 9% of its total
geographical area covered with forest. Large Area of the state is covered with
desert, has one of the highest livestock populations and therefore has severe
shortage of biomass for local use. The community forestry initiative in this
state has resulted in significant regeneration, enhanced biomass and enhanced
tree cover in the villages indicating large potential for community initiatives.
Species diversity, stem density and species richness have increased in
plantations and natural forests under community forestry indicating that
community is keen on managing the forest resources. The study indicates that
there is potential to cover more villages under JFM to enhance forest cover,
stem density and diversity of tree species.
Keywords: Rajasthan; community forestry; Aravali; joint forest management.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Aggarwal, A.,
Sharma, R.S., Suthar, B. and Kunwar, K. (2006) An ecological assessment of
greening of Aravali mountain range through joint forest management in
Rajasthan, India, Int. J. Environment and Sustainable Development, Vol. 5,
No. 1, pp.3545.
Biographical notes: Ashish Aggarwal is currently pursuing an MPhil in
Environment and Development at the University of Cambridge, UK. He
coordinated this study and his interests are property rights and conflicts in the
context of natural resource management.
Radhey Shyam Sharma is a post graduate in Agronomy from Maharana Pratap
University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur, Rajasthan. Currently, he is
working on issues related to joint forest management, watershed, lift irrigation
management and agricultural extension activities of natural resources
development programme.
Bhimraj Suthar holds a masters degree in Soil Science from Maharana Pratap
University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur, Rajasthan. His research
interests are joint forest management, local governance and natural resource
management in semi-arid watershed areas.
Kailash Kunwar holds a masters degree in Sociology from Mohan Lal
Sukhadia University, Udaipur. She is presently pursuing PhD and working on
issues of community-based intervention on new born practices and survival.

Copyright 2006 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

35

36

A. Aggarwal, R.S. Sharma, B. Suthar and K. Kunwar

Introduction

Rajasthan is the largest state in India with a geographical area of 34.22 million ha, which
constitutes 10.41% of the total land area. The state is bifurcated by Aravali hills running
south-west to north-eastern direction. Approximately 50% of the forest area of the
state lies in this hill range. The state has a forest area of 3.17 million ha that constitutes
9.26% of geographical area of the state. People of the state, especially in Eastern and
South-eastern parts, depend on the forest for fuelwood, fodder, timber and various other
Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs). According to an estimate, 90% of the energy
demand in rural Rajasthan is fulfilled by fuelwood (NSSO, 1995), majority of
which comes from forests. Likewise there is huge pressure for fodder on the forests.
Cattle population of the state is 48.44 million, which exceeds human population in the
state. These ever-increasing demands exert pressure on forests and pose management
challenges such as meeting increasing community biomass demands, regenerate forests
and enhance forest area simultaneously. As per the National Forest Policy, forest cover
should be 33% of countrys geographical area, but Rajasthan has only 4.78% of forest
cover (FSI, 2001).
Rajasthan issued the first JFM resolution on 15th March 1991 and became one
of the pioneer states to initiate JFM. Though Rajasthan has long history of community
forest management in form of traditional practices such as Kesar Chidkav
(Saffron Sprinkling), Dev Van and legendary devotion of Vishnoi community towards
flora and fauna, it was legally formalised with the JFM resolution by formation of
village level Forest Protection Committees (FPC)s. Since then, six JFM resolutions have
been issued facilitating increased community participation (especially women) and
management.
Over past 13 years, 3667 FPCs have been formed that are protecting 3767 km2 of
forest area covering approximately 12% of state forest area and involving 300,295
families (Bahuguna et al, 2004). Externally funded projects (Aravali Afforestation
Project, Afforestation and Pasture Land Development and Rajasthan Forestry Project
funded by OECF, Japan) have contributed to the spread of JFM in the state. As
substantial investment of resources and efforts has been done on JFM programme in the
state, it becomes imperative to assess its impact against its envisaged goals. In this paper,
we attempt to understand the ecological impact of JFM through the measurement
of ecological parameters. The main objective of the study was to assess the tree
biodiversity, density, basal area, biomass and productivity vis--vis the non-JFM area or
control plots.

Methodology

Seven forest divisions, representative of different geographical areas of the state were
selected for the study in consultation with the Forest Department. These were: Sikar
from north zone, Banswara, Pratapgarh and Udaipur (South) from south zone, Jaisalmer
from west zone and Bundi and Dausa from east zone. Most forest divisions were from
the Aravali mountain range as major JFM activities were carried out in this region. Four
representative FPCs from each division were selected with one extra FPC in Sikar
division. So in total 29 FPCs were studied form seven divisions. But due to very poor
growth of plantations in one FPC of Jaisalmer, it was not included in vegetation study.

An ecological assessment of greening of Aravali mountain range

37

So though 29 FPCs were studied for all the management aspects but sample plots for
vegetation study were laid only in 28 FPCs. Ecological sampling was conducted in the
JFM areas in a FPC, which constituted one or more plantations or natural forests or both.
Thus, there were 33 sample plots from 28 FPCs. Table 1 gives the details of number of
plots selected in different divisions.
Table 1

Division wise distribution of surveyed plantations and natural plots


Plantations

Natural forests

Division

FPCs
surveyed

Age range
(years)

Number of
plots

FPCs
surveyed

Number of
plots

Banswara

910

Bundi

812

Dausa

514

Jaisalmer

Pratapgarh

79

Sikar

812

Udaipur (South)

37

22

22

11

11

Total

Basic criteria adopted to measure the impact of JFM are species diversity, tree density
and basal area. Plantations and natural plots were studied with their best possible similar
control plots. Control plots were areas with similar kind of conditions as that of JFM with
no silvicultural interventions. In Jaisalmer division, suitable control plots were not
available. Management practices in the JFM area were also recorded based on group
discussions held with the FPCs.
Replicates of quadrats measuring 25 m 25 m for trees, 10 m 10 m for shrubs and
1 m 1 m long for herbs were laid. In tree quadrats, stems having more than 10 cm Girth
at Breast Height (GBH) and in shrub quadrats stems having more than 5 cm GBH were
measured and species were recorded; and all plants in the herb quadrats were counted and
number in each species recorded. In addition, approximate height of all stems in tree
quadrats was also recorded. After collecting the data from each quadrat, species richness,
Shannon Weiners species diversity index, density of trees, size class distribution of trees
and basal area were computed. Biomass in tons per ha was computed as product of
height, basal area and wood density. Wood density of these forests was assumed to be
0.71. Mean annual increment for plantation was computed by dividing biomass with age
of plantation.

Results

In plantations over seven divisions, age varies from 3 to 14 years. Average age of
plantations is 8.13 years, wherein maximum average age is in Sikar division with
10.40 years followed by Dausa and Bundi divisions with 10.25 and 10.00 years
respectively. Most recent plantations are in Jaisalmer division with an age of three years.

38

A. Aggarwal, R.S. Sharma, B. Suthar and K. Kunwar

3.1 Species richness and Shannon Weiners diversity index


In JFM plantations, species richness varies from 1 to 11. Average species richness for
FPCs across all divisions is 10. Maximum number of species, 11, is recorded for
Banswara and Dausa with longer protection (Table 2). In Banswara, higher species
richness is because of good regeneration status of natural species. The lowest species
richness of one is recorded in Jaisalmer where one species was recorded. Diversity index
in JFM plantations ranges from 0 in Jaisalmer to 2.29 in Banswara division. Pratapgarhs
diversity index is greater than two. In the control plantations, highest species richness is
eight, indicating lower species richness than JFM plantations. Similarly, the maximum
species diversity index of 2.16 is recorded in control plantations (Table 2).
Table 2

Species richness, density, diversity index, basal area and biomass of JFM plantations
and control plots

Species Diversity Basal area Biomass


Name of the
Age of Total cut
MAI
(m2/ha)
division
plantation stems/ha Density/ha richness index
t/ha
Banswara

910

28

248

Bundi
Dausa
Jaisalmer

Pratapgarh
Sikar
Udaipur
(South)

812

670

1.661.92

4.18

514

28

362

11

1.162.30

12.18

0.06

0.20

0.07

79

13

320

10

1.912.26

9.62

75.86

7.86

812

22

234.4

10

0.902.02

10.67

59.48

5.60

37

21

165

1.21.71

0.91

3.88

0.10

20

311

10

02.29

7.70

56.53

5.24

Average

11

2.222.29

2.13

11.23

0.60

26.79

1.42

115.36 10.82

Control plots
Banswara

42

140

1.821.86

1.08

5.43

Bundi

54

104

4.5

1.171.21

1.81

11.28

Dausa

46

241

7.25

1.471.92

3.60

19.55

Pratapgarh

31

191

1.471.88

2.89

16.35

Sikar

40

187

7.8

1.202.16

1.03

4.93

Udaipur
(South)

45

83

01.78

0.51

2.23

Average

42

169

02.16

1.87

10.11

In natural forests, average species richness and diversity are greater than in plantations.
In natural areas under JFM, species richness ranges from 7.50 to 16 with an average
of 11. Maximum species richness of 16 is found in Dausa division (Table 3).
For control plots, highest species richness is ten, which is significantly lower than the
natural areas under JFM. Maximum diversity index in natural JFM areas is 2.30 in
Udaipur division. In Bundi division, species diversity index of control areas is higher
than JFM forests. It is because of the presence of rich diverse vegetation in control plots
taken for survey.

An ecological assessment of greening of Aravali mountain range


Table 3

39

Species richness, density, diversity index, basal area and biomass of JFM natural
forests and control plots

Name of the
Total cut
division
stems/ha
Banswara
20
Bundi

Dausa
24
Pratapgarh
39
Sikar
32
Udaipur (South)
40
Average
24
Control plots
Banswara
26
Bundi
18
Dausa
56
Pratapgarh
61
Sikar
48
Udaipur (South)
72
Average
41

Density/ha
208
194
308
433
154
124
255

Species
richness
10
7.5
16
12
10
13
11

Diversity
index
1.671.95
1.171.91
2.17
1.772.03
1.868
2.30
1.172.30

98
114
124
248
112
108
153

8.5
10
7
8
8
8
8

1.571.65
1.592.38
1.31
1.221.88
1.661.86
1.960
1.222.38

Basal area
(m2/ha)

Biomass
(t/ha)

7.74
11.23
8.04
18.89
6.07
7.49
10.31

51.45
57.07
77.96
172.39
41.42
39.28
78.41

3.01
6.19
3.04
5.33
3.52
6.65
4.21

18.22
34.24
18.17
27.36
25.54
39.49
23.79

3.2 Tree density and basal area


Mean tree density in surveyed JFM plantation area ranges from 7 to 670. Bundi division
has highest tree density of 670, while in Dausa it is 362. Jaisalmer has lowest average tree
density of seven, which is because of its low plantation age and desert conditions. Mean
tree density in control plot is 169/ha, while in JFM plots it is 311/ha (Table 2). There is
84% increase in tree density in JFM plantation area in comparison with non-JFM area.
Highest percentage increase of 544% in tree density is in Bundi division, which can be
attributed to good protection efforts. In the natural forests, the increase of tree density in
JFM area is 67% over the non-JFM area (Table 3).
Basal area in JFM plantation patches range from 0.06 to 12.18 m2/ha (Table 2).
Though Bundi has the highest tree density, the basal area is relatively low (4.18 m2/ha).
It can be attributed to poor growth conditions in the area owing to its terrain. Dausa has
the highest basal area of 12.18 m2/ha. It can be attributed to presence of good growth
conditions in the area and longer protection time. The average basal area in plantation
control plots is 1.87 m/ha. There is 4.1 times increase in average basal area of JFM
plantation patches over control plots (Table 2). In the natural forests, the increase in basal
area of JFM area is 2.5 times over the control plots.

3.3 Effect of protection on stem cutting


Number of Cut stems in the JFM area (plantations and natural forests) is reduced than
control plots. Bundi division has maximum number of cut stems/ha in control plots and
zero in JFM plots indicating drastic decline in the number of cut stems. Likewise, in
Udaipur and Pratapgarh divisions, there is a decline in the number of cut stems in JFM
plantations. The average number of cut stems/ha in control plots is 42 while in JFM

40

A. Aggarwal, R.S. Sharma, B. Suthar and K. Kunwar

plantation plots it is 20, indicating an overall decline in the number of cut stems
(Table 2). Even in natural forests, the number of cut stems has decreased in JFM area as
compared to control plots (Table 3). The average number of cut stems/ha in control plots
was 42 while in JFM plots it was 20, indicating an overall decline in the number of cut
stems.

3.4 Size class distribution of trees


In five to ten year plantations, the difference in the distribution of trees over different
diameter classes in JFM and control plots is significant (Table 4). In less than 5 cm
category there are 53% individuals in JFM plots, whereas in control plots there
are around 36% individuals indicating that the difference is in regenerating class.
In >30 cm DBH category, there were no trees in control plots while there were 3.7% trees
in JFM plots. These trends are true for three to five year plantations and above ten year
plantations (Table 4). In three to five year old JFM plots, there are approximately
99% individuals in up to 10 cm DBH category, while in control plots there are
approximately 66% individuals for the same category.
Table 4
Type
JFM
plantation
Plantation
control

Size class distributions of trees under JFM plantations and their controls. The values
are in percent
Age range (years)

DBH <5 cm

DBH 510 cm

35

75.77

23.44

DBH 1030 cm
0.004

0.78

510

53.02

43.22

0.002

3.74

0.005

DBH >30 cm

>10

33.78

64.75

35

33.33

33.33

33.33

1.46

510

35.84

48.22

15.46

0.46

>10

29.82

43.58

26.59

Similar to plantation sites, there is a difference of distribution in lower DBH classes in


natural JFM sites and control plots (Figure 1). In less than 5 cm DBH class, there are
39% trees in natural JFM patches whereas in case of controls there are 17% trees.
In >10 cm DBH categories, the individuals are significantly higher in natural control
forests suggesting that the control plots hold larger proportion of trees in mature category
than in natural JFM areas.
Figure 1

Size class distribution of JFM natural forests and control

An ecological assessment of greening of Aravali mountain range

41

3.5 Management practices for grazing, fuel wood collection and lopping
In the 29 FPCs studied, 20 (68.96%) have framed specific rules for grazing in JFM area,
while the rest (31.04%) have no regulations (Table 5). Of these 20 FPCs, all of them
follow cut and carry method of grass harvesting. Seventy five percent FPCs have
imposed total ban on cattle grazing in JFM areas and in 25% FPCs, grazing is allowed
after grass harvesting done in October or November. Most of these FPCs have older
plantations and trees have acquired sufficient height and girth and cattle cannot trample
and hamper regeneration.
Table 5

Management rules employed for grazing and fuelwood collection in different FPCs in
Gujarat

Regulation on grazing

Number (%)

Regulation on fuelwood collection

Total ban on grazing

15 (75%)

Grazing allowed after


grass harvest

5 (25%)

Collection of dry and fallen twigs


only

15 (68.18%)

20 (100%)

Collection of dry twigs along with


harvesting of certain spp.

4 (18.19%)

Total

Total ban

Number (%)

Total

3 (13.63%)

22 (100%)

In 22 (75.86%) FPCs, communities have framed regulations for fuelwood collection.


For the rest of the FPCs (24.14%), there are no rules. Of the 22 FPCs, in 68% of FPCs,
collection of dry and fallen twigs is allowed. In 18% FPCs, along with the collection of
dry and fallen twigs, harvesting of certain species such as Prosopis juliflora and Acacia
nilotica has been allowed. These species are allowed to be harvested as they have
grown in abundance and are hindering regeneration of other species. In 14% of FPCs,
there is total ban on collection of fuelwood. In such areas, communities have alternative
source like open forest areas and plantations on private lands.
Lopping of mature trees of Khejri (Prosopis cineraria) and Desi Babool
(Acacia nilotica) mainly for collection of fodder is a common practice. These operations
have to be regulated to enhance regeneration. Only in six (20.68%) FPCs, lopping
operations are being regulated and in the remaining 23 FPCs, either trees are not mature
for lopping operation or there are no regulations. The lopped twigs in three FPCs of
Dausa and Bundi forest divisions are auctioned by the FPCs to Gujars (nomad graziers)
and in three FPCs of Sikar division, auctioning is done by the Forest Department. Every
year the nomads come from Western Rajasthan with flocks of sheep and goat only for
fodder leaves and hence wood is not cut. In Sikar, the FPCs have registered a protest with
the Forest Department to manage the auction themselves to earn better revenue.
Various methods have been adopted to protect the plantations and natural forests from
cattle and other animals. Stonewall is the most common method adopted across Rajasthan
(24), followed by vegetative fence (6), barbed wire (4) and cattle proof trench (8).
Vegetative fence has been used as a protection measure in FPCs of Dausa, Bundi and
Sikar divisions. Barbed wire is used as a protection measure only in Jaisalmer as there are
no other options available in desert area. In order to curb offenders, fines are levied in
18 (62.06%) FPCs. In Goran FPC of Udaipur (South) division, Rs. 11 is the fine amount
for the owner, if cow and buffalo enters JFM area and Rs. 25 for goat and camel.

42

A. Aggarwal, R.S. Sharma, B. Suthar and K. Kunwar

Likewise in Ganloapada FPC of Banswara divison, Rs. 51 is levied as fine for grazing
offence and Rs. 501 charged for illegal wood cutting.

3.6 Fuelwood demand and supply from JFM areas


In all the divisions studied, except for Jaisalmer division, fuelwood demand is being
fulfilled to certain extent by JFM areas. This can be explained by the fact that average
age of plantation is 9.23 years in these divisions. Moreover in these areas, focus of
plantation has been to meet fuelwood and fodder demands. In Jaisalmer division, JFM
plantations are three years old and the focus of planting has been to reduce wind velocity
and stabilise sand dunes. Fuelwood demand is fulfilled by private lands, canal side
plantations and other vacant government lands in this division.
It is observed that nearly 42% of the fuelwood demand is being fulfilled from JFM
areas. Overall, average fuelwood demand per FPC for studied divisions is 616.20 t/yr
(Table 6). JFM areas in these FPCs are supplying an average of 291.30 t/yr per FPC.
Pratapgarh and Banswara divisions fulfil over 60% of fuelwood demand from JFM areas.
This is because forests under JFM have rich vegetation cover and are being protected by
the communities. In Sikar and Dausa divisions, communities are less dependent on JFM
areas, which are reflected through lesser (30%) fuelwood demand being fulfilled from
these areas. Here, communities largely depend on agriculture residues and fuelwood is
partly collected from open forests and private farmlands.
Table 6

Demand and supply of fuelwood in FPCs under different divisions and % demand
being met from JFM forests

Division

Fuelwood demand
per FPC (t/yr)

Fuelwood supply per FPC


from JFM areas (t/yr)

% demand being
fulfilled from JFM areas

Banswara

746.70

504.00

67.50

Bundi

724.70

326.10

45.00

Dausa

486.00

145.80

30.00

Jaisalmer

319.60

0.00

0.00

Pratapgarh

786.60

550.40

69.97

Sikar

601.30

180.40

30.00

Udaipur (South)

648.50

332.40

51.25

Average

616.20

291.30

41.96

Discussion

In Rajasthan, the rural population depends on biomass-based energy sources. A major


part of the states requirement of approximately ten million tonnes annually is met from
forests (TERI, 2002). Over the years, injudicious extraction has resulted in degraded state
of forests. Through JFM initiative, the aim has been to fulfil fuelwood, fodder and other
biomass needs, along with regeneration of forests. Therefore most common silvicultural
model adopted under JFM is fuelwood and fodder model.

An ecological assessment of greening of Aravali mountain range

43

4.1 Biodiversity conservation under JFM


The study has found that under JFM, natural forests have better diversity than the
plantations. Regeneration is possible wherever rootstock is available, thus plantations
should be avoided in such areas. Simple protection measures can ensure better
biodiversity and can bring down the cost of management. In the older plantations, with
protection diversity is increased due to regeneration of natural species.

4.2 Biomass production and demand


Biomass production of a forest can be used to measure sustainability of vegetation
management. When exploitation of a forest exceeds its biomass production, it results in
degradation. Biomass production depends on a number of factors like topography,
climate, soil, species and quality of protection. Only factors that can be controlled are
protection and species. High biomass productivity no doubt is a motivating factor, but in
addition, the forests must also meet other local needs.
Average fuelwood demand per FPC in studied divisions is about 616.16 t/yr
while annual biomass production is 284.57 t/yr. Average biomass production is 46%
of the total fuelwood demand indicating a big gap in demand and supply. In Rajasthan,
only 10% of total forest is under JFM indicating large scope to enhance area under
JFM. The overall biomass production in studied JFM areas ranges from 0.19 t/ha to
124.12 t/ha.

4.3 Alternative development programmes for success of JFM


4.3.1 Income generation activities
It was observed during field visits that poorer communities of South and Eastern
Rajasthan make charcoal and sell fuelwood for their livelihood. Strict protection under
JFM has affected their livelihoods. In addition, frequent droughts in the region have
further marginalised them. As they do not have any alternative options, they are forced to
illegally cut trees, which puts them in conflict with other villagers. Most often they are
alienated from the community, which defeats the spirit of JFM. Thus, it becomes
necessary to link JFM with income generation activities. These activities could be forest
or non-forest based. In some of the FPCs, Forest Department has helped communities in
building income generation skills for activities like sewing and stitching, soap making,
vermiculture, etc. In Jethliya village of Banswara division, women have been trained in
sewing and stitching and given sewing machines on subsidised rates. Such activities
would enhance participation in JFM activities and decrease illegal exploitation for
livelihood. In Jaisalmer division, at some places, agro forestry model has been adopted
successfully. In Digha FPC of Jaisalmer division, moong (Phaseolus mungo) is being
cultivated between the plantations of Ber and Khejri. Last year the FPC earned
Rs. 20,000 from the sale of moong. In Lareka FPC, successful cultivation of medicinal
plants, Sanoy (Cassica aungustifolia), has resulted in good economic gains to the
community. In some places of South Rajasthan, cultivation of medicinal plants like
Safed musli (Chlorophytum borivilianum) is being practiced successfully. In Udaipur
district, tribals collect Safed musli from the forest and sell it in the local market. It is used
as vitaliser in various medicinal products.

44

A. Aggarwal, R.S. Sharma, B. Suthar and K. Kunwar

4.3.2 Alternative sources of energy


Rural population depends heavily on fuelwood for energy, which has put immense
pressure on the forests. Increasing population is further widening the gap between
demand and supply. With the decline in fuelwood availability, poor farmers are forced to
use cattle dung as fuel, which affects agriculture, as cattle dung is the principal manure
for poor farmers. Alternative energy sources are to be built so that pressure on forests can
be reduced. Biogas plants can be important alternative to address the increased energy
demand. Cattle dung of the large cattle population of the state will be an important source
of raw material for these plants. In Western Rajasthan, where solar energy is aplenty, an
attempt can be made to harness it through solar devices. In addition, community
awareness should be built for the success of this technology.

4.4 Participatory forest monitoring and adaptive forest management


Basic objective of participatory forest monitoring is to make people aware of the
availability and richness of flora and fauna existing in their forest so that they
can plan their sustainable use. Communities in the past were well aware of sustainable
practices and lived in harmony with nature. The JFM has revived community
management.

4.5 Implications for vegetation management


In Rajasthan, JFM areas have made significant impact in enhancing vegetation cover,
regeneration and biomass. Given that only 10% of forest in Rajasthan is covered under
JFM, there is a lot of scope to improve vegetation through expansion of JFM. Further
devolving the powers and empowering communities to take all management decisions
would enhance their motivation level leading to better results. Priorities of people, such
as species of their choice, should be given importance, as they are the main biomass
users. In the studied divisions, it was observed that under much prevalent fuelwood and
fodder model of JFM, multipurpose species, species of local use and NTFP species have
been largely ignored.

Acknowledgements
We thank the guidance and support of Professor N.H. Ravindranath and his team from
the Centre of Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Banglore; Shri Abhijit
Ghose, APCCF, Rajasthan Forest Department, Jaipur and Shri S. N. Bhise, Head of
Natural Resource Development Programme, Seva Mandir, Udaipur, Rajasthan in this
study. We thank the Ford Foundation for their financial assistance to the project.

An ecological assessment of greening of Aravali mountain range

45

References
Bahuguna, V.K., Mitra, K., Capistrano, D. and Saigal, S. (2004) Root to Canopy: Regenerating
Forests Through Community- State Partnerships, Commonwealth Forestry Association- India
Chapter and Winrock International India.
Forest Survey of India (FSI) (2001) Status of Forest 2001, Ministry of Environment and Forests,
Dehradun.
NSSO (1995) Energy Used by Indian Households, 50th round, 19931994, National Sample
Survey Organization, Government of India.
TERI (2002) Liquid Petroleum Gas in the Rural Market, Tata Energy Research Institute,
New Delhi, Seva Mandir, Udaipur.