Perceptions of Forest Resource Change and the Role of Participation: Evidence from Marginalized Communities in India

Background and Purpose: Environmental degradation increasingly affects communities that rely on forests for subsistence, including access to fuelwood, fodder, and non-timber forest products (NTFPs). These changes are not experienced uniformly but are understood through the lens of people’s everyday relationships with forest landscapes, institutions, and histories of inclusion or exclusion. While much research highlights biophysical change, there is less attention to how people come to perceive these changes and the social factors that shape their interpretations. Environmental social work increasingly centers environmental change as a matter of justice, shaped by the social categories like caste, land access, and institutional inclusion. This study investigates how forest-dependent households perceive forest resource change and how these perceptions vary by caste identity, material access, and levels of engagement in governance processes. The research contributes to social work's growing focus on community-led environmental governance and environmental justice frameworks grounded in lived realities (Kemp & Palinkas, 2015; Billiot, 2022).

Method: This study draws on data collected through household surveys with 1,046 respondents across three ecologically diverse watersheds in India—selected for their agroecological variation and history of NGO-led natural resource governance. A proportional stratified random sampling method based on household’s landholding size ensured socioeconomic representation across revenue villages. Data was gathered through household surveys and analyzed using multiple linear regression to examine how social category, education, economic status, land ownership, and governance participation predict perceptions of forest resource change. The dependent variable Forest Resource Perception (FRP) variable summarizes reported changes in five forest resources—fuelwood, fodder, grazing, timber, and non-timber forest products, into a single score ranging from -1 (decline) to 1 (improvement).

Results: The regression model significantly predicted FRP scores (Adjusted R² = .24, F (9,147) = 6.55, p < .001). Participation emerged as a strong negative predictor (β = -0.46, p < .001), suggesting that households more actively involved in forest governance perceived greater environmental decline. Households belonging to SC (Scheduled Caste) (β = .36, p = .017) and OBC (Other Backward Caste) (β = .53, p = .024) groups perceived forest conditions more positively compared to those in the General category, while ST (Scheduled Tribe) households showed a marginal trend (β = .41, p = .075). Education, Below Poverty Line status, land ownership, and involvement in government employment schemes (MGNREGA) were not statistically significant.

Conclusions and Implications: The negative association between governance participation and perception of forest resource change may reflect the closer and more sustained exposure participants have to forest conditions through their involvement in activities like protection, monitoring, and afforestation. Rather than reflecting increased pessimism, this closer engagement may lead to more informed and critical assessments of environmental conditions. These findings point to the need for participatory programs to recognize that involvement can deepen awareness of degradation and should be matched with responsive institutional support and resource regeneration efforts.