The Historical Roots of Assam-Nagaland Border Disputes and Their Impact on Forest Resources

The Assam-Nagaland border dispute, rooted in colonial policies and ambiguous land demarcations, has led to persistent conflicts and significant environmental degradation, particularly affecting forest resources critical to tribal livelihoods. This study investigates the historical origins of this dispute and its socio-economic and ecological impacts, emphasizing the need for clear land titling and community-driven conservation to ensure sustainable resource management and regional stability. By analyzing colonial interventions and their lasting effects, the research highlights how unresolved territorial claims continue to undermine effective governance and threaten biodiversity in the border region. Employing qualitative methods, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 16 purposively selected stakeholders from five border villages, representing diverse tribal communities, supplemented by archival records, government reports, and media sources from 2021–2025. Findings reveal that colonial policies, notably the Treaty of Yandaboo (1826) and the Indian Forest Act (1878), disrupted communal land systems, creating ambiguous boundaries that intensified after Nagaland’s formation in 1963. Stakeholders reported that unclear land ownership fuels violent clashes, such as the 1985 Merapani incident (over 100 deaths), with Nagaland’s alleged encroachment of 66,241 hectares, including 17,500 hectares forest land, driving deforestation. Field observations and interviews confirmed a 55.71% loss of common property resources (1,401,184.8 acres) from 1947–2000, leading to biodiversity decline. The nexus between border disputes and forest management is evident in competing agrarian claims, with Assam’s settlement policies and Nagaland’s infrastructure expansion exacerbating resource depletion. The study implies that unresolved territorial disputes undermine sustainable forest governance, threatening tribal livelihoods. It concludes that addressing colonial legacies through clear land titling and participatory boundary demarcation is essential.