# Introduction Rural poor people are not just 'the poor'; they have faces and names. They are real people: poor farmers, poor fishers, poor nomads and poor women producers. Overcoming poverty means individual and collective empowerment, strengthening productive and income generating capacities and increasing opportunities. This requires a clear understanding of the activities of poor people and of the natural, social, economic and political environment in which they live. It also requires supportive policies, institutions, services and investment. The last two decades have witnessed a paradigm shift in conservation and Natural Resource Management away from costly state-centered control towards approaches in which local people play a much more active role. These reforms purportedly aim to increase resource user participation in Natural Resource Management decisions and benefits by restructuring the power relations between state and communities through the transfer of management authority to local-level organisations. Yet, the reality rarely reflects this rhetoric. Three quarters of the world's poorest people live in rural areas, and their livelihoods depend on farming, pastoralism, forestry, and artisanal fishing -all of which can be subsumed under the term "agriculture". Support to agriculture is well recognized as essential for poverty reduction and for securing people's right to food. Agriculture is also recognized as an engine of propoor growth (OECD, 2006;World Bank, 2007;Oxfam, 2009). According to OECD DAC, "Agriculture connects economic growth and the rural poor" but "its importance goes beyond incomes and reduces poverty by lowering and stabilizing food prices; improving employment for poor rural people; increasing demand for consumer goods and services, and stimulating growth in the nonfarm economy" (OECD, 2006). Secure access to natural resources and their sustainable management is, in turn, key for agriculture-based livelihoods. Today, this is particularly important as climate change and growing competition over scarce resources (notably land and water) affect the natural resource base for agriculture and for rural poverty reduction (Brunori, et al., 2008;World Bank, 2007;Nelleman et.al, 2009). Moreover, secure access to natural resources is at the core of poor rural people's entitlements as Community, as rights over resources are often linked to membership in social organisations, recognition of collective identities, and access to services. It is reported that India is currently losing between 5 to 7 Mil. Hectares of food lands every year due to soil degradation. Among the poor people about 3.7 per cent in the world. Among the poor people about in India out other 329 million hectares (mi. hec) of geographical areas, only 264 million hectares has potential for agriculture production. Land degradation has taken place on 175 Mil hectares that is water erosion on 111 Mi. Hectares, wind erosion and acidity on 39 Mil. Hectares and associated special problem on 25 Mil. Hectares (Ashokaman et.al. 2997 andgrenal, 1997). It is estimated that about 6000 million tons (mi. Tonns) of soil is eroded annually (Swamination 1996. In India more that 70 per cent of the population depends on agriculture and rarely three fourth of the total area land depends on rain. The forty millions of farmers in India are cultivating at dry land is linked with the vagaries and mercy of the monsoon, it was reported that the Natural Resource Management through Integrated watershed development programme (IWDP) were launched during the late Seventeen the and Eighties. Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2004 in his book throughout the islands of the Caribbean, initiatives are underway to engage communities in co-management of natural resources. The stated rationale is often that community involvement can help to reduce the degradation of marine and terrestrial biodiversity, address resource use conflicts, improve the community's quality of\life and provide opportunities for economic activity. Other goals include improved governance through building stronger community institutions and increased community capacity, empowerment and voice, which can in turn provide a vehicle for strengthening local governance in other spheres of social and economic development. The issue of control over natural resources is considered closely linked to issues of power or good governance, in particular within resource-rich African countries. "Access and control over resources in Africa is considered the major governance issue, especially for rural people, and is the bread and butter issue on which democracy must deliver. NRM [Natural Resource Management] is central to good governance and increasing enfranchisement of rural peoples", argues a 2002 USAID report (P-3). Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2004 # Research Methodology Various methods are available to collect for a study. It is the responsibility of the researcher to select the appropriate method for collecting adequate, accurate and reliable data. Especially in case of primary source of information the researcher adopt interview method as a best method of data collection. This study hence adopted interview method with help of structured interview schedule for the collection of data from respondents. This approach in data collection helped the researcher in many ways. Initially, most of the respondents were cynic to answer to the questions relating to Natural Resource Management, but one to one approach resulted in providing a room to clarify their doubts. However the researcher spent enough time to elucidate the mission of the study. The researcher also adopted focused group interview method (FGD) with help of semi-structured interview to elicit information from the general public about the community participation on Natural Resource Management. The researcher always stayed with the respondents during the data collection. It enabled the researcher to build the rapport with the respondents and got ample opportunities to collect the data and information from the field, moreover it had been the participatory rural appraisal (PRA) method. Volume XVII Issue II Version I 4. There will be no relationship in personal and sociopsychological characteristics of beneficiaries on their extent of participation, level of knowledge and adoption of Natural Resource Management components between the Natural Resource Management beneficiaries of the governmental and N G Os. # IV. Conceptual Framework for the Study This section provided an insight to develop the theoretical frame work which served as a guidance to identify the independent variables for the present study. Some of the variables were also identified after discussion with extension scientists and extension staff in the study area. Based on this, a conceptual model has been dveloped and represented in figure -1. # Age The age of the respondents signifies the level of maturity and to what extent they are liable to their family /social commitment and performing home chores. In general the middle aged is more committed than the young this productive aged group is equivalent to farming functions and its other activities. In the present study, the age among the respondents are categorized as below 35 years, 36 yrs to 45 years and 45 years and above age wise classification as shown in Table -1 In the category of Large farmers a majority of 52(50%) respondents are in the age group of above 45 years old.35 (34%) respondents are in the age between 36 years to 45 years that is middle aged and 16(16%) respondents are below in the age of 35 years that is young aged. The mean age of respondents is 37 years. V. # Literacy Level Education represents the formal education that the respondents have had. Since the level of education is one of the important factors which determines the level of understanding of the characteristics of the sample responders. Further the higher education of respondents helps to empower faster than lower grade education. The level of education is grouped in to illiterates, can sign (knowing only signature putting), primary level, Secondary level and graduation. The level of education among the respondents is illustrated in Table-2. # Go NGO At the high performing NGO NRM project, a maximum percentage of farmers were observed in functional, consultation information giving, material incentives or interactive participation types and very negligible percentage was observed in non-participation. The farmers also indicated similar types of participation. The reasons might be that High Performing N G O established its familiarity, rapport and credibility among the farmers. NRM project had been initiated based on local needs and problems with better towards scientific methodology might have enhanced the involvement in activities to attain higher profitability form the dry land technologies. Educational status probably hindered the participation because the farmers were able to acquire the relevant information without involvement thorough other communication media VI. # Conclusion Based on the results, the following implications are derived which could be used to plan the future extension strategies in a better manner. The scale developed to measure the extent of people's participation in different stages of planning and implementation of NRM would serve as a useful tool for operational level NRM programme staff. This will be useful to detect the exact weakness and due attention could be given to overcome deficiencies and ensure better involvement of people in the programme. Secondly, the higher the level and type of participation, more will the knowledge and adoption of technologies which indicates that to increase the knowledge and adoption of practices, the beneficiaries should be involved in planning and implementation activities of the programme. Thirdly,the high performing groups used various participatory approaches to enlist the people's participation. It indicates that more thrust can be given to participatory approaches for successful implementtation of development programmes in general and NRM in particular. Fourthly, Educational status, extension system linkage scientific orientation, innovativeness and attitude do play significant role in participation and adoption of NRM technologies. The implementing agency has to give more importance to educate people, to increase scientific knowledge and develop the favorable attitude by using different extension teaching methods. Fifthly, as the government NRM programme beneficiaries expressed lack of knowledge about programme as constraints in participation, the awareness has to be created about programme by using different media and methods before planning and implementation. Sixthly, the availability of funds for N G Os is a major stumbling block to implement programme, hence the Central and State governments should provide necessary finance based on the activities and performance of N G Os in NRM. Seventhly, while implementing NRM technologies in any community and public lands, emphasis should be given for community empowerment and involvement and finally the NRM can be implemented jointly with collaborative action of G Os and N G Os so that both can attain the benefits and complement and supplement each other thereby the beneficiaries stand to gain. The types of participation in of Low Performing-N G O NRM programme, one-third (33.50%) farmers did not participate in NRM activities, whereas, nearly onefifth farmers were observed in consultation, information giving and passive types of participation.It is found that scientific orientation and attitude acted as important variables in influencing the participation level in High Performing-NGO NRM programme. Favourable attitude and more scientific knowledge would induce the farmers to analysis the technology in a scientific manner to suit to their farm situation. This might have influenced the farmers to participate in the NRM programme.It indicates that a unit's increase in risk orientation, scientific orientation, innovativeness and attitude, ceteris paribus would result in increase in participation level to the extent of 7.12, 6.69,18.97 and 7.39 units respectively. Similarly, a unit of increase in educational status would result in reduction in participation by 11 1![Figure 1: Conceptual Model](image-2.png "Figure 1") 2![Figure 2: Age-wise Distribution of the Respondents Age is one of the demographic factors especially in the farming field. At present, the adults are unwilling to involve in the farming activity. The researcher made its open-ended for the lower age limit and upper age limit. The details relating to the age of the respondents provided in the above table indicates that 247 (48 %) respondents are marginal farmers, 170 (33%) respondents are small farmers and 103 (19 %) respondents are large farmers among 520 farmers. In the marginal farmers 64 (26 %) of the respondents are at the age of below 35 years, 73(30%) respondents are of between 36 to 45 years old and a majority of 110 (44%) respondents are of above 45 years old. At the small farmers 47(28%) respondents are at the age of below 35 years, 36 (21%) respondents are of 36 years to 45 years old. A majority of 87 (51%) respondents are in the age of above 45 years old.In the category of Large farmers a majority of 52(50%) respondents are in the age group of above 45 years old.35 (34%) respondents are in the age between 36 years to 45 years that is middle aged and 16(16%) respondents are below in the age of 35 years that is young aged. The mean age of respondents is 37 years.](image-3.png "Figure 2 :") 3![Figure 3: Literacy Level of Respondent](image-4.png "Figure 3") II. were framed.1. There will be no difference in the extent ofparticipation of beneficiaries in different activities ofNatural Resource Management between thegovernmental and N G O Natural ResourceManagement projects.2. There will be no difference in knowledge level onNatural Resource Management project componentsamong the beneficiaries of governmental and N GOs Natural Resource Management activities.3. There will be no difference in adoption level ofNatural Resource Management practices among12the beneficiaries of the governmental and N G Osprojects.( C ) 1The ageS.No RespondentsBelow35years (young)36 years to 45 years (middle)Above 45 years (old)Total1Marginal farmers201 (81%)37 (15%)9 (4%)247 (48%)2Small farmers119 (70%)30 (18%)21 (12%)170 (33%)3Large farmers75 (73%)7 (7%)21 (20%)103 (20%)Total395 (76%)74 (14%)51 (10%)520 (100%) 2Volume XVII Issue II Version I( C ) solutions, conducted more educational programmes,planned and implemented with the beneficiaries and thismight have influenced towards higher types ofparticipation on NRM project.a) Strategic mechanism for effective planning and implementation of NRM programme For effective and efficient planning and implementation of NRM programme, both the G O and N G O should have a common modus operandi. Both at orgaisational and field level they should have co-operation and collaboration so that both can complement and supplement each other. NRM programme could be implemented jointly so that both the organisations can gain benefits. The G O can utilize the services of dedicated N G Os workers to ensure people's participation, whereas N G Os can utilize the services of technical expertise and funds available from GO for effective planning and implementation of Natural Resource Management programme. For effective planning and implementation of NRM project the following strategies are worth considering. ? Consistent and effective policies are needed for the protection, conservation and maintenance of soil and water resources. ? Development of NRM technologies that are technically and environmentally sound, economically viable, socially and culturally acceptable and which may lead to sustainable land use. ? Suggested model For effective planning and efficient implementation of NRMVolume XVII Issue II Version I ( C ) Year 2017 © 2017 Global Journals Inc. (US) Community Participation in Natural Resource Management in Madurai District-TN INDIA * A new approach unprotected area management: A decade of conservation and development JAdhikari TLama 1997. 1986 * King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation/Annapurna Conservation Area. 2. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. 1979. Citizen participation in the American federal system NepalKathmandu U.S. Government Printing Office 357 pp Washington, D.C * Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources AAgrawal World Development 29 2001 * A framework to analyse the robustness of social-ecological systems from an institutional perspective JMAnderies MAJansson EOstrom Ecology and Society 9 18 2004 * A ladder of citizen participation SAArnstein Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35 4 1969 * 320 pp. bear hunting controversy: a case study in contemporary wildlife management BRBarber Coll. Ag.and Life Sci Nat. Resour., N.Y.S. 56 1984 University of California Press Cornell Univ. HDRU Publ. 94-4. Dept Strong democracy: participatory politics for a new age * What's the matter with liberalism? Berkeley RBeiner 1992 University of California Press 197 * Confronting the coral reef crisis DRBellwood TPHughes CFolke MNystrom Nature 429 2004 * Tools for Development. A handbook for those engaged in development activity. Performance and Effectiveness Department Dfid DFID 2002 * DEade JRowlands ) Development Methods and Approaches: Critical Reflections Oxford Oxfam GB 2003 * Participation and Accountability in Development Management EABretty The Journal of Development Studies 40 2 2003 * Two Ears of Corn: A Guide to People-Centred Agricultural Improvement RBunch Oklahoma: World Neighbours 1995 Third Edition * Rural Planning in Developing Countries BDalal-Clayton DDent ODubois 2003 Earth scan Publications Ltd London * Development Planning: Concepts and Tools for Planners, Managers and Facilitators RDale 2004 Zed Books London * PNDearden JParker Service training needs assessment: A guide to the successful assessment of training needs Nepal 1991 AETU of University of Wolver Hampton for the Training Division, Ministry of Forestry and Environment Report by * Stakeholder Participation and Analysis. London: Social Development Division Dfid DFID 1995 * References Références Referencias