innovation and to perform various roles/support knowledge inputs in sustaining
developmental programmes (Kochendorfer-Lucius and van de Sand 2000; Padaki
and Vaz 2003; Agarwal 2013) particularly for management of PAs.
Analysis of results and discussion with stakeholders clearly suggests innovations
in technology modulation as per location specific needs, processes of delivery with
local institutional arrangements, and social engineering component to ensure
backward and forward linkages with hand-holding of community are essential
components from sustainability point of view. Such management strategy in
inclusive manner with system approach by engaging different actors can really
address the problems of conservation vis-à-vis livelihoods issues in and around
PAs at the local, national as well as global level. This is in agreement with suggestions made by Petursson et al. (2011); Feary et al. (2015) and Kothari et al.
(2015) for current need of professionalism in protected area governance and
management approaches and the fostering of skilled community conservation
practitioners through ongoing learning and adaptation or transformation. In such an
endeavor, field-based technological interventions cannot only lead to integrate
conservation and livelihood around PAs, but also contribute significantly toward
sustainable development while mitigating climate change. Strategically, it has to be
ensured that such interventions are really location specific and affordable to the
participating community to earn their livelihood while, conserving ecosystem,
biodiversity, and environment.
6 Conclusions: Adaptations and Institutional
Arrangements Involving Community
Analysis of the above discussed PPA programme interventions has evidently
demonstrated the role of appropriate technological interventions with affordable
solutions to the problems faced by the local communities for livelihood as well as
conservation gains. Data with relevant indicators has indicated significant element
of sustainability in implementation of such network model programme for social,
ecological and livelihoods benefits wherein critical role of various actors and factors
have been recognized (Box 1 and 2). Technology models evolved at micro level
(like Figs. 1 and 2 in Box 2) have successfully demonstrated that local/tribal
communities and PAs can exist in a progressive society, while, ensuring mutual
benefits toward ecosystem services. As discussed above, this can be achieved
through appropriate technology applications and investments planning in participatory mode. Such technology benefits will open new alternative livelihoods
opportunities to local community with reduced dependency on forest resources
through good management practices. In such efforts, both environmental and
societal adaptations to climate change are programmatically to be embedded as
evidently seen by introducing energy efficient devices for cooking and water
heating, thus, contributing to reduced carbon foot prints. Analysis of work also
592
S.K. Agarwal
developmental programmes (Kochendorfer-Lucius and van de Sand 2000; Padaki
and Vaz 2003; Agarwal 2013) particularly for management of PAs.
Analysis of results and discussion with stakeholders clearly suggests innovations
in technology modulation as per location specific needs, processes of delivery with
local institutional arrangements, and social engineering component to ensure
backward and forward linkages with hand-holding of community are essential
components from sustainability point of view. Such management strategy in
inclusive manner with system approach by engaging different actors can really
address the problems of conservation vis-à-vis livelihoods issues in and around
PAs at the local, national as well as global level. This is in agreement with suggestions made by Petursson et al. (2011); Feary et al. (2015) and Kothari et al.
(2015) for current need of professionalism in protected area governance and
management approaches and the fostering of skilled community conservation
practitioners through ongoing learning and adaptation or transformation. In such an
endeavor, field-based technological interventions cannot only lead to integrate
conservation and livelihood around PAs, but also contribute significantly toward
sustainable development while mitigating climate change. Strategically, it has to be
ensured that such interventions are really location specific and affordable to the
participating community to earn their livelihood while, conserving ecosystem,
biodiversity, and environment.
6 Conclusions: Adaptations and Institutional
Arrangements Involving Community
Analysis of the above discussed PPA programme interventions has evidently
demonstrated the role of appropriate technological interventions with affordable
solutions to the problems faced by the local communities for livelihood as well as
conservation gains. Data with relevant indicators has indicated significant element
of sustainability in implementation of such network model programme for social,
ecological and livelihoods benefits wherein critical role of various actors and factors
have been recognized (Box 1 and 2). Technology models evolved at micro level
(like Figs. 1 and 2 in Box 2) have successfully demonstrated that local/tribal
communities and PAs can exist in a progressive society, while, ensuring mutual
benefits toward ecosystem services. As discussed above, this can be achieved
through appropriate technology applications and investments planning in participatory mode. Such technology benefits will open new alternative livelihoods
opportunities to local community with reduced dependency on forest resources
through good management practices. In such efforts, both environmental and
societal adaptations to climate change are programmatically to be embedded as
evidently seen by introducing energy efficient devices for cooking and water
heating, thus, contributing to reduced carbon foot prints. Analysis of work also
592
S.K. Agarwal