Impact of Rishikesh-Karanprayag railway line on the agroecosystem of Maletha village of Garhwal Himalaya

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Ruchika Sharma
B.S. Bhandari
Sarita Kumari
Arti Falswal

Abstract

Uttarakhand is a newly incepted state, geographically and culturally distinct from the plains and is the prime destination of tourists not only from India but also from different parts of the globe. Railways in Uttarakhand will certainly play a crucial role in the development of the state. Ministry of Railways of India has launched and initiated a project to connect the Char dhams of the state which will surely prove a landmark in the developmental feat of the state but development and modernization at the cost of disturbing the ecosystem in general and agricultural ecosystem in particular will create an imbalance in the livelihood of the people who by and large depend on agriculture economy. The present study was carried out in an agriculturally rich medium sized village of Uttarakhand. The survey reveal that climatic and geographical conditions of the village are suitable for the cultivation of large number of vegetables, fruits, cereals, millets, pulses and fodder plants supporting the livelihood of the natives. Land acquisition would have a negative impact on the socio-economic condition of the farmers as well as on the traditional crop diversity of the area as the railway project covers most of the fertile land. Thus, for reducing the havoc in the lives of the villagers government should provide land as an exchange as most of the population is agriculture dependent and at the same time degradation should be viewed with long-term vision

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Sharma, R. ., Bhandari, B. ., Kumari , S. ., & Falswal, A. . (2021). Impact of Rishikesh-Karanprayag railway line on the agroecosystem of Maletha village of Garhwal Himalaya. Environment Conservation Journal, 22(1&2), 6-11. https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.2021.221202

References

  1. Azadi, H., Ho, P. and Hasfiati, L., 2011. Agricultural land conversion drivers: A comparison between less developed, developing and developed countries. Land Degradation Development, 22:596–604.
  2. Badola, R., Hussain, S. A., Dobriyal, P. and Barthwal, S., 2015. Assessing the effectiveness of policies in sustaining and promoting ecosystem services in the Indian Himalayas. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 11:216–224.
  3. Baltensperger, D.D., 2002. Progress with proso, pearl and other millets In J. Janick and A. Whipkey (eds.), Trends in new crops and new uses. Alexandria (VA): American Society for Horticultural Science Press. pp: 1-9.
  4. Chawla, A., Rajkumar, S., Singh, K. N., Lal, B., Thukral, A.K. and Singh, R.D., 2008. Plant species diversity along an altitudinal gradient of Bhabha Valley in Western Himalaya. Journal of Mountain Science, 5(2):157–177.
  5. Cernia, M. M., 2000. Risks, safeguards and reconstruction: a model for population displacement and resettlement. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(41):3659-3678.
  6. Council for Social Development, 2008. Indian social development report: Development and displacement. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
  7. Chakraborty, A., R., Shukla, K., Sachdeva, P., Roy, S. and Joshi P. K., 2016a. The climate change conundrum and the Himalayan forests: The way forward into the future. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B: Biological Sciences.
  8. Charlery, L., Nielsen, M. R., Meilby, H and Smith-Hall, C., 2016. Effects of new roads on environmental resource use in the Central Himalaya. Sustainability, 8:363.
  9. De Wet, C., 2001. Economic development and population displacement: Can everybody win? Economic & Political Weekly, 36(50):4637-4646.
  10. Ellis, F., 2000. Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.
  11. Fernandes, W., 1998. Land acquisition (amendment) bill, 1998: Rights of project-affected people ignored. Economic and Political Weekly, 33(42- 43):2703-2706.
  12. Fernandes, W., 2005. Rehabilitation as a right: Where is the policy? Social Action. 55(2):123-137.
  13. Fernandes, W., 2009. India’s half century search for a resettlement policy and the right to livelihood. In R. Modi (eds.), Beyond relocation: The imperative of sustainable resettlement. New Delhi: Sage. pp: 102–126.
  14. Hoy, A., Katel, O., Thapa, P., Dendup, N. and Matschullat, J., 2016. Climatic changes and their impact on socio-economic sectors in the Bhutan Himalayas: An implementation strategy. Regional Environmental Change, 16: 1401–1415.
  15. ILO, 2011. Research Report on Rural Labour and Employment in Vietnam. International Labour Organization: Hanoi, Vietnam.
  16. Lu, H., Zhang, H., Liu, K., Wu, N., Li, Y., Zhou, K., Ye, M., Zhang, T., Zhang, H., Yang, X., Shen, L., Xu, D., and Li, Q., 2009. Earliest Domestication of common millet (Panicum miliaceum) in East Asia extended to 10,000 years ago. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U S A., 106(18):7367-7372.
  17. Mahapatra, L.K., 1999. Resettlement, impoverishment and reconstruction in India: Development for the deprived. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
  18. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 2019. Sector-wise contribution of GDP India.
  19. Nesbitt M. Grains, 2005. In: Prance G, Nesbitt M, (eds.), Cultural History of Plants. London: Routledge, pp: 45–60.
  20. Nguyen, T.H.T., Tran, V.T., Bui, Q.T., Man, Q.H. and de Vries Walter, T., 2016. Socio-economic effects of agricultural land conversion for urban development: Case study of Hanoi, Vietnam. Land Use Policy, 54:583–592.
  21. Oxfam, 2011. The growing scandal surrounding the new wave of investments in land. Land and Power. Oxfam Briefing Paper, pp: 151.
  22. Parwez, S. and Sen, V., 2016. Special economic zone, land acquisition, and impact on rural India. Emerging Economy Studies, 2:223–239.
  23. Penz, P., Drydyk, J., and Bose, P. S., 2011. Displacement by development: Ethics, rights and responsibilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  24. Rasul G., 2014. Food, water and energy security in South Asia: A nexus perspective from the Hindu Kush Himalayan region. Environmental Science & Policy, 39:35–48.
  25. Sandhu, H. and Sandhu, S., 2014. Linking ecosystem services with the constituents of human well-being for poverty alleviation in eastern Himalayas. Ecological Economics, 107:65–75.
  26. Sharma, R.N., 2010. Changing facets of involuntary displacement and resettlement in India. Social Change, 40(1):503-524.
  27. Sharma, S, 2014. Trains to chug through Rishikesh forest In Role of Rail systems in preserving Biosphere, Environment, Forests, Ecology, Biodiversity and Wildlife, Water resources, Pollution control, relevant statutory policies, the NGT and MoEF. Times Of India.
  28. Schneider, A., 2012. Monitoring land cover change in urban and peri-urban areas using dense time stacks of Landsat satellite data and a data mining approach. Remote Sensing Environment, 124:689–704.
  29. The Oakland Institute, 2011a. Agrisol Energy and Pharos Global Agriculture Fund’s Land Deal in Tanzania. Understanding Land Investment Deals in Africa. Land Deal Brief.
  30. UN DESA, 2010. Foreign land purchases for agriculture: What impact on sustainable development? Sustainable development innovation briefs. United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs. 8.
  31. World Bank, 2004. Involuntary resettlement sourcebook: Planning and implementation of development projects. Washington D.C.: Author.
  32. Zaman, M. Q., 1990. Land acquisition and compensation in involuntary resettlement. Land, Resources and Environment, 14:4. http://sandrp.wordpress.com (21/07/2015)