Public on Conserving an Urban Wetland: A Case from Kerala, India

14 International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 14-19, January-March 2010

Copyright © 2010, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Globalis prohibited.

Keywords: Biodiversity,Conservation,Ecotourism,EnvironmentalConsciousness,Natureawareness

IntroductIon

Conservation of biodiversity, by prioritizing and managing important areas has become one of the major issues in several countries (Pimbert & Pretty 1997). It is obvious that many such ecologically and environmentally important areas are found closely attached with people’s livelihood. In general, success of an ecosystem conservation programs directly depends on the public’s attitudes, their process of evaluation and understanding of the programs and how closely they can associate themselves with

programs and its benefits. Direct opinion poll can be an effective tool to find out the reach of any conservation programs/ projects to the public. People’s opinion is a reflection of various issues they confront in their day to day life and also the flow of relevant information to them and a range of other forces working in the rear. Studies conducted by Silori (2007), Bajracharya et al. (2006), and Christopoulou and Tsachalidis (2004) highlights the importance of assessing the people’s perception for different conserva-tion programs elsewhere.

Ecotourism provides an avenue for nature conservation with the participation of the local inhabitants. It is often considered as an ef-

Public on conserving an urban Wetland:A case from Kerala, India

P.P.NikhilRaj,SálimAliCentreforOrnithologyandNaturalHistory(SACON),India

P.A.Azeez,SálimAliCentreforOrnithologyandNaturalHistory(SACON),India

AbstrActThepresentstudyexaminesresponsesofthepublictoaproposedecotourismprogram.SeveralindividualswererandomlycontactedinKerala,India,toelicittheirobservationsandresponsestotheproposedprogram,includingresidents,localtravelersandworkers.Thoughalargeshareofthesamplepopulationsupportedtheproject,anticipatingthatitwouldacceleratethedevelopmentofthecityandincreasetheirannualearnings,manywereunawareoftheecologicalimportanceofthemangrovewetland.Only5%ofthetotalsampledpopulationswereawareoftheimportanceofconservingwetlandecosystemsinagrowingcity.ThisexemplifiesthecheerlessstateoftheenvironmentalconsciousnessofthepublicinKerala,despitethatthecityisamongthemostliterate,sociallyadvancedandenvironmentallycognizantpopulationsinIndia.Thisstudyhighlightstheneedfordevelopmentofmuchdeeperscientificconsciousnessamongthepublicatlarge.

DOI: 10.4018/jsesd.2010010102

International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 14-19, January-March 2010 15


fective means for promoting conservation of endangered species and habitat (Bookbinder et al., 1998) in the developing countries, despite many social and cultural changes of negative consequences it is likely to bring in unless properly taken care off. After the start of new millennia eco tourism has become one of the globally important business ventures (Xue-mei, 2004). Benefits from different ecosystems to the society such as ecological services, biodiversity and ethical, cultural and bequest values can be exchanged in the market and transformed in terms of currency through ecotourism (Walpole et al., 2001).

Wetlands are rich in several aspects such as biodiversity and ecological good and services it offer. Wetlands are also one of the most threatened ecosystems of the world (Turner, 1991). Wetlands located in the urban centers are under going constant degradation due to different levels of anthropogenic pressures / activities like urban development, encroach-ment, flow of domestic sewage, pesticides, fertilizers and industrial effluents, over fishing, boating, infestation with aquatic weeds and eutrophication, disturbances from excessive recreational activities and tourism, and diver-sion of water from irrigation, domestic use or industrial uses (Verma, 2001). Over all, social prejudice of wetlands as ‘wastelands’ apparently accelerate the pace of transformation either in to built up area or abandoned waste lands. In last few decades wetland conservation is getting world wide attention since it protect the society from different kind of vagaries including water scarcity, flood, environmental pollution, and micro climatic changes. Many of the modern wetland management programs have become more holistic in approach by expanding the issue of conservation to the surrounding local communities, such as in the case of ecotourism, to ensure the ecological balance (Christopou-lou & Tsachalidis, 2004). Urban wetlands are important in maintaining urban landscape by acting as the basic ecological infrastructure for the growing cities. The urban wetlands directly or indirectly influence the health, economy, and social set up of a city. Since

urban wetland systems are under tremendous pressure of urbanization, the highly consumer centric life style of city population will directly effect the sustainability of these wetlands. The correct valuation of the ecological goods and services derivable or derived from wetlands do not actually get reflected in decision making during city planning and development. The market forces that decide land uses changes during urbanization have not started valuing wetlands appropriately. Payments for ecologi-cal services are largely getting disregarded by the market forces.

The unique location of Kerala in the lap of Western Ghats endorses a vast area of forested lands. In addition, the topography with undu-lating terrain having subdued hills and steep scarp slopes with a wide range of altitude (from below mean sea level to 2,694 meters above mean sea level) provide the state a vast area of wetlands (Nayar & Nayar, 1997) compared to other Indian states. There are a network of wild life sanctuaries and National Parks in the state for conserving the natural areas as well as its valuable wild life. Population explosion (The population density of the state is 819 persons per Square Kilometer); coupled with urbanization and infrastructure development are the main threat for these protected areas. The neo-rich utilitarian attitude of the people, reallocated most of the state’s wetlands in to dry built up areas. Most of the wetlands in the state were rice-cultivating areas as the case of Kole, Pokkali or Kuttanad. Nevertheless, due to low economic returns from agriculture fueled with the pressure from booming real estate business ventures most of the wetlands undergo rapid conversion (Raj and Azeez, 2009).

Recently the tourism department of Kerala started focusing on more ecotourism projects for the sustainable ecological development of the state (Thampi, 2005). One of the main ob-jectives of the state’s tourism department is to transform the tourism industry of the state into eco friendly tourism. After the implementation of the first ecotourism project theThenmalaeco tourism project in 1999, the department of tourism is into joining forces with other



protected areas of the states to promote eco tourism (Kerala economic review 2009). M/s Tourism (Resorts) Kerala Limited (TRKL), a Government of Kerala enterprise, has initiated an eco tourism project in Kottuli wetlands, located in the heart of Calicut city of Kerala, proclaiming it essentially as a measure for conservation of the wetland. The present study evaluates people’s attitude towards conserving the Kottuli wetlands.

Materials and method

The Kottuli wetland is situated (75º80E, 11º25N) towards the eastern portion of Calicut city, the third largest city in Kerala state with population of 436556 people. The wetland at Kottuli is one among the 94 wetlands of national importance identified by the Government of India for conservation action under National Wetland Conservation Programme (MoEF, 2006-2007). The wetland spread in 250 acres lies along the National Highway (NH 17). It is bounded by Connolly canal in the south-west. Nedungottur, Chevayur and Nellikkode panchayaths forms its northwest, northeast, and southeast boundaries respectively (Figure 1.). The wetland is perennial and is connected with the Connolly canal. The channel on the other hand connects the northern Korapuzha River with the southern Kallayipuzha River, both opening separately to the Arabian Sea. The ecotourism project include tourism complex with parking area, shopping plaza, restaurant, courtyard, facilitation centre, interpretation centre, amphitheatre, bird sanctuary, butterfly park, observation tower, water and otter park, children’s play area, musical dancing fountain and toilet facilities. The project will facilitate the Kalipoika, the small lake inside the project area, for boating. The project aims to serve an average of 500-600 visitors per day.

The cumulative changes from the multifari-ous activities taking place in the project area are likely to have its impacts on the socio economic setting of the local people. It directly offers employment for several skilled and semi-skilled laborers. The local public will be involved

directly and indirectly in quite a few related activities. Many youngsters have chance of learning more about nature and work as tourist guide, and get an opportunity to disseminate their knowledge and experience, and to take part directly in nature conservation related activities. The project is expected to support tourist-based sector including taxi / auto drivers, merchants, tourist home services, travel booking services and hotels directly. The indirect beneficiaries include those involved in real estate business, currency exchange services, property managers, shop keepers and skilled workers.

In order to find out the people’s opinions on the project a brief socio-economic survey was conducted. Randomly selected individuals from various locations of the city were presented about the project and every fifth person was queried for their opinion about the Ecotourism cum conservation project. To reduce / avoid bias in terms of professional or any other interests of the respondents we contacted almost equal samples from people engaged in different oc-cupations (Figure 2).

result and discussion

The Kottuli wetlands are aesthetically pleasing and rich in biodiversity. The wetlands also are likely to serve the city through several ecological services. In terms of economics the total ecosystem services provided by the wetland is about US$ 3.6 million, estimated according to Costanza et al. (1997). The total number of avian species in the area is 70, and the species density is 0.68, much above several other comparable wetlands in the state. The high natural avian diversity and their high visibility is a sound selling proposition in the case of this wetland. The rich floral biodiversity of 250 floral species including unique mangroves and its rare water birds (Azeez et al., 2009) also highly enriches tourism potential of the Kottuli wetlands. Kerala is recognized as one of the fifty ‘must see destination’ in the world (Jacob, 2003). In 2006 the state earned Rs.6880/- crores from tourism (www.keralaplanningboard.org). Its picturesque landscape, greenery, and backwaters, traditional ayurvedic rejuvenation centers labeled as ‘medi-



Figure1.Kottuliwetlands

Figure2.Questionnaire



cal tourism’ make tourism a promising industry in the state. Being the third most important city in the state, with exquisite beaches, traditional art galleries and museums made the Calicut city a destination in the tourist map of several tourist circuits. The Kottuli ecotourism project will be a further attraction to the tourists.

As noted earlier in our survey of people’s opinion about Kottuli ecotourism project, we could obtain patient responses from 100 randomly selected people. Among them 89% supported the project, 5% were opposing it while 6% were neutral in attitude towards the project. 89% of the respondents supported the project assumptive that it will boost up the development of the state in general and the city in particular. Those responding in neutral manner (6%) were either not aware of the project, do not have any special regards for any such projects or were not concerned about related issues. People’s annual income and their opinion were not found to be related. However, people in occupations related more with tourism, travel or sales such as auto/ taxi drivers and textile shop owners were very positive towards the project. 5% of the total respondents were opposed the establishment of such projects in the city. Most of the respondents who supported the venture expect varying increments in their annual income as the project comes to operation. Only 4% of the people expected more than 50% increase in their annual

income. 23% of the respondents did not expect any benefit from the project (Figure 3).

Those respondents, who opposed the project (5%), were by and large skeptical about such projects and were firm in their judgment on its malfunctioning, ill management, and financial corruptions associated with such projects. They put forth the example of the present status of another urban beautification project MananchiraSquare in the city, which was taken up by the authorities with much fanfare.

Only 5% of the respondents were concerned about conserving their local biodiversity and the project’s implication on the same. The low number of people who are appreciative of the need for conservation is of concern for a state like Kerala, a state recognized as first among all other states of India having high human development index, high literacy (90.9%), female biased sex ratio, and low population growth. This may be a reflection of the lack of nature education in the academic curriculum or lack of earnest understanding among the public about nature conservations, or an implication of the growing consumerist attitude among the pub-lic. The study highlights the need for developing much deeper understanding among the public to conserve and protect environment and ecosystems in the highly literate society of Kerala. It seems that concern about environment and conservation is limited only to higher educated segments in the

Figure3.Expectedoutcomefromtheproject



state; among the larger segments it is only skin deep. The larger segment of believed to be highly cognizant, but consumerist society, subsidized by huge foreign currency remittances (about 8000 mil-lion $ per annum) is ignorant or unconcerned with issues of conservation, environmental protection, sustainable development etc. Rethinking among the policy makers and educators is warranted to develop an appropriate strategy to inculcate the values of environmental conservation in the real day to day life of the common public.

references

Azeez, P. A., Bhupathy, S., Raj, N., & Chandra, R. (2009). Conservation of Kottuli Wetlands, Calicut, Kerala. Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History (SACON).

Bajracharya, S. B., Furley, P. A., & Newton, A. C. (2006). Impacts of community-based conservation on local communities in the Annapurna Conserva-tion Area, Nepal. BiodiversityandConservation, 15, 2765–2786. doi:10.1007/s10531-005-1343-x

Bookbinder, M. P., Dinerstein, E., Rijal, A., Cauley, H., & Rajouria, A. (1998). Ecotourism’s Sup-port of Biodiversity Conservation. ConservationBiology, 12(6), 1399–1404. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.97229.x

Christopoulou, O. G., & Tsachalidis, E. (2004). Conservation Policies For Protected Areas (Wetlands) In Greece: A Survey Of Local Residents’ Attitude. WaterAir and Soil PollutionFocus, 4, 445–457. doi:10.1023/B:WAFO.0000044817.88422.64

Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., De Groots, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., & Hannon, B. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Science, 387.

Jacob, N. (2003). KeralaTourismPolicy-issuesandoptions. Unpublished master’s thesis School of In-ternational Relations, Mahathma Gandhi University Kottayam, Kerala.

MoEF. (2006-2007). Annual Report . In AnnexureVIA (pp. 273–276). VI B.

Nayar, S., & Nayar, N. M. (1997). Wetlands In: The Natural resources of Kerala.

Pimbert, M. P., & Pretty, J. N. (1997). Parks, people and professionals: putting ‘participation’ protected-area management . In Ghimire, K., & Pimbert, M. P. (Eds.), SocialChangeandConservation (pp. 297–330). London: Earthscan Publication Limited.

Raj, P. P. N., & Azeez, P. A. (2009). Real Estate and Agricultural Wetlands in Kerala. Economic andPoliticalWeekly, XLIV(5), 63–66.

Silori, C. S. (2007). Perception of local people towards conservation of forest resources in Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, north-western Himalaya, India. BiodiversityandConservation, 16, 211–222. doi:10.1007/s10531-006-9116-8

Thampi.(2005). Ecotourism in Kerala, India: Les-sons from the Eco-Development Project in Periyar Tiger Reserve.

Turner, R. K. (1991). Economics and Wetland Man-agement. Ambio, 20.

Walpole, M. J., Goodwin, H. J., & Kari, G. R. (2001). Ward Pricing Policy for Tourism in Protected Areas: Lessons from Komodo National Park, Indonesia. ConservationBiology, 15(1).

Xue-mei, L., & Ji-gang, B. (2004). Unraveling eco-tourism practice: Problem analysis based on stake-holder. EarthandEnvironmentalScience,14(1).

PPNikhilRajisaPhDscholarandhisareaofstudyinterestisassessmentofstatus,managementandconservationofnaturalresources.

PAAzeezisaPhDholderworkingonenvironmentalmanagement,environmentalchemistryandsustainabledevelopment.CurrentlyDrAzeezistheDirectorofSACON.

Public on Conserving an Urban Wetland: A Case from Kerala, India

Documents