Unequal
struggle
INDIA
India’s present and looming environmental problems stem largely from mounting population pressures and the effects of often ill-conceived and under-regulated industrialisation. The country’s population — 844 million according to the 1991 census— is growing at 2.1% a year, placing India’s agricultural, grazing and forest lands under relentless stress. Overgrazing, damaging agricultural practices and the encroachment of farming into marginal areas have combined to cause massive deforestation and soil erosion.
A Ministry of Environment study estimates that 175 million ha -or 54% of India's geographic area- are now degraded, with productivity on another 90 million ha in decline. Deforestation in the 1980s averaged 147,000 ha a year, and now only 11.5% of India has forest cover.
In desperate attempts to increase yields, farmers overuse and over-irrigate their land. This leaves to topsoil erosion and raises its saline content, which reduces productivity and eventually renders the land useless for cultivation. Further, irrigation canals are often not properly lined or maintained, which can waterlog the surrounding fields in addition to wasting a precious resource. Further, some migratory tribal communities still practise "slash and bum" cultivation, which destroys large tracts of forest.
Many damaging agricultural techniques, however, are embedded in the economic culture of farming communities. As a result, the most successful government programmes aimed at protecting the soil and forests have been schemes designed to educate the villagers responsible for the damage. In West Bengal, for example, 700 "village protection committees" were created, with each held responsible for the welfare of a patch of forest. In return, villagers received employment in forestry projects and a proportion of the timber harvest. This programme has already succeeded in rejuvinating many West Bengal forests.
But there are more examples of the government being the root of the problem rather than the solution. This is particularly true in irrigation schemes, many of which have been poorly planned, executed and maintained. In the deserts of Rajasthan, the still unfinished India Gandhi Nahar project — India’s largest irrigation scheme — has already led to soil salinisation and waterlogging that have ruined much potential farmland.
The government also bears part of the responsibility for India’s industrially created air and water pollution problems. The legal framework of environmental regulations is impressive, but enforcement is so poor that many rules fail to be acted upon. In addition, the state pollution control boards and regulatory agencies responsible for monitoring industries are simply not armed with enough sanctions to do the job.
Although the government requires that heavy-polluting industries, such as pesticides, pharmaceuticals and paper production — as well any project in any industry costing more than Rs 200 million (US$7.75 million) — must get approval from pollution control boards before being licensed. However, such environmental clearances are often mere formalities, as industries have been able to pressure the government by arguing the cost of adhering to regulations will cause a loss of jobs or production. The government, unless pressed by the public or environmental activists, rarely acts to ensure its own environmental standards are met.
The result is escalating pollution. New Delhi is now considered the third most polluted world capital. Levels of harmful suspended particulates in the air over industrial areas of the city exceed the maximum acceptable standard set by the World Health Organisation by an average of five times, occasionally peaking at 12 times. Over 30% of air pollution is produced by industry and 53% by vehicle emissions.
Poor air-pollution controls have also made India the fifth-largest producer of so-called greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide output has risen by almost nine times since 1950, with coal accounting for 72% of the total. But the problem of greenhouse gases has become entangled in North-South issues, with many Indian environmentalists arguing that ozone depletion and global warming are problems created by the developed countries, and which should therefore be solved by the industrialised nations.
However, Indian industry has also shown itself incapable of instituting environmentally sound practices, with firms unwilling in the absence of financial incentives to invest in systems to prevent pollution or clean up their production processes.
Environmentalists are now concerned that the government’s new industrial policy — crafted in response to India’s huge economic problems — means that exisiting environmental guidelines will be increasingly ignored, or even abolished, in order to promote output. More flexible location and expansion policies and decreased licensing could spell even less monitoring and enforcement.
Amitaba Bhaftacharya of the UN Development Programme, however, argues that increased freedoms for industry and growing foreign involvement in the economy will change the business culture in India in favour of environmental concerns. 1 he influence of techniques used by foreign investors, increased technology transfers and a longer-term view, Bhattacharya believes, will improve industry’s environmental record.
The only certainty about the future of environmental issues in India is that hard choices will have to be made, as development and poverty alleviation conflict with environmental concerns. The conflict over the extensive hydroelectric and water scheme for the Narmada River valley illustrates the problem. Here, the issue is whether the benefits of building the dam — intended to provide water for the parched lowlands in Guarat state and electric power for the cities — outweigh the displacement of tribal villages and the loss of more forests.
Regional disparities and political pressures will also force the government into more projects that are potentially damaging to the environment. The recent escalation of the conflict over the distribution of the Cauvery River waters between the southern states of Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu — where upstream Karnataka has refused to abide by a tribunal’s decree to provide a certain amount of water to downstream Tamil Nadu — shows how forcefully local interests will fight over development resources.
-Michael Schuman in New Delhi
Source : Far Eastern Economic Review, 19 Sept, 1991
Recycling Point Dot Com
(C) 2000 All Rights Reserved