, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 297–307 | Cite as

Poverty, development, and Himalayan ecosystems

  • Harpinder Sandhu
  • Sukhbir Sandhu


The Himalayas are rich in biodiversity but vulnerable to anthropogenic pressures. They are also host to growing number of rural poor who are dependent on forest and ecosystem services for their livelihood. Local and global efforts to integrate poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation in the Himalayas remain elusive so far. In this work, we highlight two key impediments in achieving sustainable development in the Himalayas. On the positive side, we also highlight the work of Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), a research organization based in India that seeks to integrate biodiversity concerns with livelihood security. For impediments, we draw on two examples from the Darjeeling district, India, in Eastern Himalayan region to illustrate how development organizations are failing to simultaneously address poverty and environmental issues. Based on the success of ATREE, we then propose a conceptual framework to integrate livelihood generating activities with sustainable and equitable development agenda. We recommend developing a Hindu-Kush Himalayan Ecosystem Services Network in the region to formulate a strategy for further action. We conclude by offering measures to address the challenge of integrating livelihood and environment issues through this network.


Development Ecosystem services Himalayas Poverty Protected areas 



The authors acknowledge the discussions with the ATREE, India staff especially Dr Pashupati Chaudhary, Sam Thomas, and Anand Gazmer during the field observations and the work of ATREE in the Darjeeling region that shaped their perspective to develop this paper. Authors also acknowledge the interactions and conversations with the local villagers in the area that helped to understand the critical issues in the region. Thanks also to Dr Nakul Chettri and Dr Golam Rasul at the ICIMOD, Nepal for the productive discussions that contributed to the development of the framework to understand poverty alleviation, livelihood security, and sustainable development in the broader HKH region. Authors also thank Prof. Kamal Bawa and two anonymous reviewers for providing helpful comments on the manuscript.


  1. Adams, W.M., R. Aveling, D. Brockington, B. Dickson, J. Elliot, J. Hutton, D. Roe, B. Vira, et al. 2004. Biodiversity conservation and the eradication of poverty. Science 306: 1146–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbier, E.B. 2012. The green economy post Rio +20. Science 338: 887–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrett, C.B., A.J. Travis, and P. Dasgupta. 2011. On biodiversity conservation and poverty traps. Proceedings of the National Academic of Sciences, USA 108: 13907–13912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bawa, K.S. 2012. India’s path to knowledge. Science 335: 1573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bawa, K.S. 2013. Knowledge, institutions and human resources for conservation of biodiversity. In Conservation biology: Voices from the tropics, ed. P.H. Raven, N.S. Sodhi, and L. Gibson. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Bawa, K.S., G. Balachander, and P. Raven. 2008. A case for new institutions. Science 319: 136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bawa, K.S., L.P. Koh, T.M. Lee, J. Liu, P.S. Ramakrishnan, D.W. Yu, Y.P. Zhanf, and P.H. Raven. 2010. China, India, and the environment. Science 327: 1457–1459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bawa, K.S., S. Rai, S. Kamal, and P. Chaudhary. 2012. Land use intensification, small landholders, and biodiversity conservation: Perspectives from the Eastern Himalayas. In Land use intensification: Effects on agriculture, biodiversity and ecological processes, ed. D.B. Lindenmayer, S.A. Cunningham, and A.G. Young. Canberra: CSIRO Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Bunn, S.E., and A.H. Arthington. 2002. Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environmental Management 30: 492–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Butchart, S.H.M., M. Walpole, B. Collen, A. van Strien, J.P.W. Scharlemann, R.E.A. Almond, J.E.M. Baillie, B. Bomhard, et al. 2010. Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent declines. Science 328: 1164–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chaudhary, P., and K.S. Bawa. 2011. Local perceptions of climate change validated by scientific evidence in the Himalayas. Biology Letters 7: 767–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chettri, N., B. Shakya, R. Thapa, and E. Sharma. 2008. Status of a protected area system in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas: An analysis of PA coverage. International Journal of Biodiversity Science & Management 4: 164–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen, A. 2010. The multidimensional poverty assessment tool: a new framework for measuring rural poverty. Development in Practice 20: 887–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DeClerck, F., J.C. Ingram, and C.M. Rumbaitis del Rio. 2006. The role of ecological theory and practice in poverty alleviation and environmental conservation. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4: 533–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dudgeon, D. 2000. The ecology of tropical Asian rivers and streams in relation to biodiversity conservation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31: 239–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fisher, J.A., G. Patenaude, P. Meir, A.J. Nightingale, M.D.A. Rounsevell, M. Williams, and I.H. Woodhouse. 2013. Strengthening conceptual foundations: Analysing frameworks for ecosystem services and poverty alleviation research. Global Environmental Change 23: 1098–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Government of India. 1927. The Indian Forest Act, 1927. New Delhi: Central Legislative Assembly.Google Scholar
  18. Government of India. 2013. Census of India 2011. The Registrar General and Census Commissioner, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi. Retrieved March, 2014, from
  19. Hughes, R.M., and R.F. Noss. 1992. Biological diversity and biological integrity: current concerns for lakes and streams. Fisheries 17: 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. IUCN. 2001. Biodiversity impact on large dams. Background Paper 1, page 63. New York: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.Google Scholar
  21. Kamal, S., S. Rai, and K.S. Bawa. 2012. Enhancing conservation and livelihood security in biodiversity hotspots—A case study. Mountain biodiversity: Conservation and management. Kathmandu: ICIMOD.Google Scholar
  22. Kar, D., A.V. Nagaratha, T.V. Ramachandra, and S.C. Dey. 2006. Fish and conservation aspects in an aquatic ecosystems in northeastern India. Zoos 21: 2308–2315.Google Scholar
  23. MEA. 2005. Ecosystem and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  24. MRC. 2014. Water, Energy and Food security in the context of climate change for the Mekong River Basin: Ho Chi Minh City Declaration: Mekong River Commission Summit.Google Scholar
  25. Perrings, C., A. Duraiappah, A. Larigauderie, and H. Mooney. 2011. The biodiversity and ecosystem services science–policy interface. Science 331: 1139–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pradhan, N.S., V.R. Khadgi, L. Schipper, N. Kaur, and T. Geoghegan. 2012. Role of policy and institutions in local adaptation to climate change—Case studies on responses to too much and too little water in the Hindu-Kush Himalayas. Kathmandu: ICIMOD.Google Scholar
  27. Pretty, J. 2002. Agri-Culture: Reconnecting People, Land and Nature. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  28. Rasul, G. 2014a. Food, water, and energy security in South Asia: A nexus perspective from the Hindu Kush Himalayan region. Environmental Science & Policy 39: 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rasul, G. 2014b. Why Eastern Himalayan countries should cooperate in transboundary water resource management. Water Policy 16: 19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sachs, J.D., J.E.M. Baillie, W.J. Sutherland, P.R. Armsworth, N. Ash, J. Beddington, T.M. Blackburn, B. Collen, et al. 2009. Biodiversity conservation and the millennium development goals. Science 325: 1502–1503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sandhu, H. 2012. Balancing nature and society: adoption of ecosystem services framework in Eastern Himalayas. In Proceedings of the international society for ecological economics 2012 conference—ecological economics and Rio +20: challenges and contributions for a green economy, Rio De Janeiro, June 16–19.Google Scholar
  32. Sandhu, H., and S. Sandhu. 2014. Linking ecosystem services with the constituents of human well-being for poverty alleviation in eastern Himalayas. Ecological Economics 107: 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sandhu, H., and S. Wratten. 2013. Ecosystem services in farmland and cities. In Ecosystem services in agricultural and urban landscapes, ed. S. Wratten, H. Sandhu, R. Cullen, and R. Costanza. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  34. SANDRP. 2012. Free flowing and biodiversity rich Rivers: Most Endangered species in India. Delhi: South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  35. SECC. 2011. The socio economic and caste census. New Delhi: Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India.Google Scholar
  36. Strange, T., and A. Bayley. 2008. Sustainable development: Linking economy, Society and Environment. New York: OECD.Google Scholar
  37. Subba, B. 2012. Studying amphibians in Khangchendzonga Biosphere Reserve, Sikkim. Eastern Himalayas 1: 1. (A quarterly newsletter of the ATREE Eastern Himalayas/Northeast India Programme. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  38. UN. 1998. Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  39. UN. 2000. United Nations millennium declaration. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  40. UN. 2012. The future we want. Rio de Janeiro: United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  41. UN. 2013. The Millennium development goals report. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  42. UN. 2014. United Nations Statistics Division. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  43. UNEP. 2011. Towards a green economy: Pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication. Nairobi: UNEP. Retrieved 1 May, 2014, from
  44. UNFCC. 2006. Conference of the parties serving as the meeting of the parties to the Kyoto protocol. New York: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.Google Scholar
  45. Wikramanayake, E.D. 2002. Terrestrial ecoregions of the Indo Pacific: A conservation assessment. Washington DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  46. World Bank. 2009. Global economic prospects 2009: Commodities at the crossroads. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  47. World Bank. 2012. World development report. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  48. Wratten, S., H. Sandhu, R., Cullen, and R. Costanza eds. 2013. Ecosystem services in agricultural and urban landscapes. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  49. WWF 2006. Review of biodiversity in Northeast India. Background Paper 13, page 46. Delhi: WWF.Google Scholar
  50. Zhang, K., Y. Zhang, H. Tian, X. Cheng, H. Dang, and Q. Zhang. 2013. Sustainability of social-ecological systems under conservation projects: Lessons from a biodiversity hotspot in western China. Biological Conservation 158: 205–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of the EnvironmentFlinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.School of ManagementUniversity of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations