(Download) Union Bank of India P.O Exam Solved Paper (English Language) ]
Held on: 09-01-2011
Read the following interview and answer the given questions based on that. Some words have been printed in bold to help you locate them white answering some of the questions.
A pioneering new book, Gender and Green Governance, explores a central question: If women adequate representation of forestry institution, would make a difference to them the communities and forests as a national resource? Interview with the author. Why has access to forests been such a conflictridden issue?
This is not surprising. Forests constitute not just community and national wealth, but global wealth. But for millions, forests are also critical for livelihoods and their daily lives. Your first book, Cold Hearths and Barren Slopes (1986), was about forest. Is there an evolution of argument here?
Yes indeed. In Cold Hearths and Barren Slopes, I had argued that social forestry, with its-down implementation and focus on commercial species, was neither ‘social’ nor ‘forestry’, and would protect neither forests nor village livelihoods. The answer, I argues, lay in allowing forest communities to mange local forests. Finally, in 1990, India launched the joint forest management programme and Nepal also started community forestry. So I decided to see for myself how community forestry was actually doing.
Between 1995 and 1999, I travelled extensively across India and Nepal and found a paradox. Forests were indeed becoming greener but women’s problem of firewood shortages persisted and in many cases had become more acute. Also, despite their high stakes in forest, women continued to be largely excluded from forest management. I coined the term “participatory exclusions” to describe this. However, the current book is less about women’s exclusion. I ask: What if women were present in forest governance? What difference would that make? But has this question not been raised before? Economists researching environment collective action have paid little attention to gender. Scholars from other disciplines focusing on gender and governance have been concerned mainly with women’s near absence from governance institutions. The presumption is that once women are present all good things will follow. But can we assume this? No. Rural women relationship with forest is complex. On the one hand, their everyday dependence on forests for firewood, fodder, etc, creates a strong stake in conversation. On the other, the same dependence can compel them to extract heavily from forest. As one landless women told me: “Of course, it hurts me to cut a green branch but what do I do if my children are hungry?” Taking an agnostic position, I decide to test varied propositions, controlling for otherfactors.
What did you find? First, women’s greater presence enhance enhances their effective voice in decision-making. And there is a critical mass effect: If forest management groups have 25-33 per cent female members in their executive committees it significantly increases the likelihood of women makes a particular difference. When present in sufficient number they are more likely to attend meetings and voice their concerns than landed women. So what matters is not just including more women, but more poor women. Second, and unexpectedly, groups with more women typically made stricter forest use rules. Why is this the case? Mainly because they receive poorer forest from the forest department. To regenerate these they have to sacrifice their immediate needs. Women from household with some land have some fallback. But remarkably even in groups with more landless women, although extraction is higher, they still balance self-interest with conservation goals, when placed in decision-making positions.
Third, groups with more women outperform other groups in improving forest conditions, despite getting poorer forest. Involving women substantially improves protection and conflict resolution, helps the use of their knowledge of local biodiversity, and raises children’s awareness about conservation.
1. What was author’s view on “Social Forestry Scheme”?
(1) A great success
(2) Beneficial for villagers
(3) Neither good nor bad
(4) Should have been implemented as ‘top-down’
(5) None of these
2. Which of the following is one of the reason of forest being a conflict-ridden issue?
(1) Some countries have larger forest cover
(2) There is less awareness about global warming
(3) High dependence of many of forests
(4) Less representation of women
(5) Less representation of local women
3. The author is advocating inclusion of—
(1) More landless women
(2) More landed women
(3) More women irrespective of their financial status
(4) Local people
(5) Younger women in the age group of 25-33 years
4. Which of the following best describes “participatory exclusion”, as used in the interview?
(1) Outside support
(3) Benefitting without self interest
(4) Contributing with profits
(5) None of these
5. In the second question the interviewer asked- Is more an evolution of argument here?’ Which of the following best describes that?
(1) From Barren to Greener slopes
(2) From local group to local groups with more women
(3) A fine balance between conservation and commercial forestry
(4) Too-down approach to Community forestry
(5) Participatory excision to Greener slopes
6. What percent of female members tin the Executive Committee for Forest Management is being recommended by the author?
(1) Less than 25%
(2) More than 25%
(4) About 75%
(5) None of these
7. Why does author say, ‘Rural women’s relationship with forests is complex’?
(1) Dependence forces them to extracts and also have concern for conservation
(2) If they project forests, their livelihood is severely affected
(3) Poor women have been excluded from forest management
(4) They cannot be asked to restore forests which are critical for them
(5) Greener forests do not meet the requirement of firewood
8. Landless women, when in decision making role—
(1) extract much more from forest
(2) improve their own financial status
(3) do not care for forest
(4) are able to need conservation objectives as well as their own interest
(5) fulfill their own interest at the cost of conservation goals
9. When more women are involved, which of the following also happens?
(1) They get poorer forests
(2) They come to know about conservation needs
(3) Children become more aware abut conservation
(4) They are able to devote more time to conversation
(5) They get a more comprehensive understanding of local biodiversity
(1) holding in check