Keywords
Adi Tribe
Blast Fishing
River Leasing
Commodification of Rivers and Streams
How to Cite
Abstract
This paper examines continuity and changes in the socio-cultural significance of rivers and streams among the Adi tribe of Arunachal Pradesh, with particular attention to the impacts of modern fishing technologies and market-driven resource extraction. Drawing on qualitative ethnographic data from five villages in Siang District, the study explores Indigenous Knowledge Systems governing rivers and stream ownership, boundary demarcation, ritual significance, and community-based fishing practices. The findings reveal that while traditional practices such as Kegung, Nguok Oknam, and Sibok Pattnam continue to embody principles of ecological restraint, sustainability, and collective action, these systems are increasingly undermined by modern fishing methods, including blast fishing, electrofishing, and river-leasing arrangements. These processes have contributed to ecological degradation, declining fish stocks, and reconfigured cultural meaning attached to rivers and streams. Situating the analysis within the frameworks of Indigenous Knowledge Systems and practice theory, the paper argues that rivers and streams among the Adi are being transformed from culturally embedded commons into contested and commodified spaces, with profound implications for cultural continuity, food security, and social cohesion.
References
1. Baviskar, A. (2007): Waterscapes: The Cultural Politics of a Natural Resource, New Delhi: Permanent Black.
2. Berkes, F. (2012). Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
3. Berkes, F, J Colding, and C Folke (2000): ‘Rediscovery of Traditional Ecological Knowledge as Adaptive Management’, Ecological Applications, Vol 10, No 5, pp 1251–62.
4. Blackburn, S (2003): Colonial Contact in the Hidden Land: Oral History among the Adi and Other Tribes of Arunachal Pradesh, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
5. Boelens, R. (2014): ‘Cultural Politics and the Hydrosocial Cycle: Water, Power and Identity’, Geoforum, Vol. 57, pp. 234–47.
6. Bourdieu, P (1977): Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Elwin, V (1959): A Philosophy for NEFA, Shillong: North-East Frontier Agency.
8. Gadgil, M, and R Guha (1995): Ecology and Equity: The Use and Abuse of Nature in Contemporary India, London: Routledge.
9. Ingold, T (2000): The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill, London: Routledge.
10. Karlsson, B G (2011): Unruly Hills: A Political Ecology of India’s Northeast, New York: Berghahn Books.
11. Middleton, B. R. (2015): Trust in the Land: New Directions in Tribal Conservation, Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
12. Pauly, D, V Christensen, S Guénette, T J Pitcher, U R Sumaila, C J Walters, R Watson, and D Zeller (2002): ‘Towards Sustainability in World Fisheries’, Nature, Vol 418, No 6898, pp 689–95.
13. Scott, J C (1998): Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed, New Haven: Yale University Press.
14. Strang, V (2004): The Meaning of Water, Oxford: Berg.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 South India Journal of Social Sciences