INTEGRATED PROTECTED AREA CO-MANAGEMENT (IPAC) - BIDS

Integrated Resource Development Plan estimates that “at least half a million participate to a
greater or lesser extent in SRF resource utilization” 23 . Nevertheless, various studies pointed to
the fact that poverty levels of the population living around the SRF are likely to be high (For an
analysis on SIZ poverty levels, see district and upazila profiles in Chapter 2).
The extraction of goods from the Sundarbans has had a harmful effect on the terrestrial and
aquatic resource base. Even in the most remote parts of the SRF, the largest trees of Sundri and
some other species are gradually disappearing from the forest. This is true even in the three
Wildlife Sanctuaries included within the SRF. It is commonly accepted even within the Forest
Department that the forest is being depleted at a rate faster than it can replenish itself. There are
several other documents concluding that the ‘Sundarbans are in depletion’ 24 . That this
depletion has continued in the decade as also evident from interviews with people living in the
area in the present study.
Studies of the economic analysis of those having economic and ecological impact on the SRF
have been confined principally to provide general account of the populations and descriptions of
the nature and amount of goods extracted in the areas surrounding the SRF. On the other hand,
there exist a large number of studies on poverty, however, for areas throughout rural
Bangladesh. There are little specific information on the SRF areas. Analyses undertaken of
threats and opportunities of the SRF have commonly identified the presence of a large
population of poor households in the immediate vicinity of the SRF, including many thousands
that depend directly on the direct use of the SRF resources for their survival. The MARC
surveys of 1996 include household surveys of poor households in the buffer areas of the
Sundarbans 25 . The socio-economic reporting from those surveys (such as those included in the
final Integrated Resources Management Plan, Volume I) highlight the characteristics of the
surrounding poor, but offer little information about the other stakeholders involved in resource
extraction.
The draft revised SBCP (Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project) proposal prepared by
the Forest Department in 2003 identified a full range of user group stakeholder categories with
an analysis of the extent to which the hundreds of thousands of poor resource users hide other
more powerful actors 26 .
The increased population with few alternative livelihood opportunities poses a serious threat to
the Sundarbans which is the main cause of mangrove destruction (FAO 2003; Waggoner and
Ausubel 2001; Ong 1995). Moreover, dependence of local people on the forest is high (18% of
the households in the SIZ are dependent on the forest, as the present study reveals) and in future
this dependence will increase (Anon 2001c), which is likely to aggravate the existing pressure
on the government mechanisms for forest management and protection 27 .
23 Integrated Resource Development Plan, Volume I, 1998.
24 AGRIFOR Consult (2008). Formulation Study for Sundarbans Environmental And Livelihoods Security (SEALS)
project, EU, Bangladesh; Sundarban Biodiversity Conservation Project. 1999. Financial proposal 2, Loan
component. ARCADIS Euroconsult. In association with Winrock International, Kranti and Naco, Government of
Bangladesh.
25 MARC 1995, Socio-Economic Study Final Report, FAO/UNDP Project BGD/84/056, Integrated Resources
Development of the Sundarbans Reserve Forest, Khulna, Bangladesh.
26 See also Rahman (2007), CNRS
27 The present study suggests that more than 28 percent of SIZ population are dependent on SRF (Chapter 2).
3