Eagerness to communalize

I will have to note a very curious phenomenon in the media (mainstream as well as social) regarding the Western Ghat protests. There is an eagerness to pain the protests as if coming from the Catholic church.

I happened to watch a news channel in which the reporter was asking a priest about the position of the Church in this whole thing. The priest corrected him saying, "it is not the Church; it is the farmers. Just because I am a priest does not mean that I am talking for Church right now". The reporter meekly nodded and quickly moved away.

I find this obsession to communalize this whole thing very nauseating, especially coming from those quarters who allegedly uphold the secular tradition of India. In every protest, you can see people from every community gathered together. But the media do not want to see it. They want to project as if it is a communal issue. Same case even with social media.

What could be the reason? In my mind, there is only one thing behind it - divide and conquer. The same tactic that British used against Indians during the freedom struggle. The hope is that, by discrediting the protests as communal, it would die down. Nobody wants to acknowledge the most obvious fact that the most organized community in that area is the Christians, hence it is very natural to see them leading the whole thing.

I can only say, how pathetic the media & pro-report forces have become. Once this whole episode ends, I hope they will sit back, think over this ugly game they played and at least feel shameful. So that they won't repeat this for another issue.

A critique of Kasturirangan Report - Interim Conclusion

Let me conclude (an interim basis) and understand the views of my friends (if anybody cares to give feedback).

I am told that we live in a democracy. My understanding of conflict resolution within democracy has the following logical steps: Understanding the issue through dialogues => Looking for proposals for resolution => Resolve (through iterative dialogues and revisions) => Implement.

In the case of the Western Ghat reports, I see a different trend. This is how it happened: A few experts came up with recommendations => Elite politicians thought they understood the pulse of the people => Elites and Experts discussed within themselves and refined the proposals => They went for Implementation (Of course, feedback from the public was requested and it was given. It is a different matter altogether that nothing changed before and after inviting public feedback).

There is a term for this kind of governance. ARISTOCRACY.

I belong to a city where a metro rail is being planned. I did not see many people getting into streets protesting it. Why? It is not that there was no property issues. But people were compensated REASONABLY. If crores can be spend as compensation for a mere railway project in a City, then why is it that nobody is talking about it in such a big project in the Rural area? Again, when a project is planned in the city, appropriate consultations were done before going ahead with it, and people, realizing the importance of the project supported willingly. Why is it that nothing is done when it came to the Western Ghat reports? There could be only a few reasons 1) Authorities realized they cannot convince people because it is anti-people and cannot be compensated enough 2) Authorities did not care because they thought the people are stupid 3) Authorities knew the risk, but thought of playing a cheating game so that if they get away, they can save a lot. You may find the correct answer for yourself. For me, it is a combination of everything at some levels. Now that it has backfired, still I think they will get away with Option 3, simply because the people in the Ghats cannot protest beyond a level. And there is always an option to suppress it with media, other powerful lobbies and ,worst case, force.

My humble suggestion is this. Lets put both the reports on hold. Let the discussions begin through proper channels, let there by proposals and revision and finalized action plan. Then go for implementation. Let us go back to the democratic way of doing things.

Whatever I have suggested is just from my thought process. What the larger community in those places want may be something more or less or different. I am not a mouthpiece for them. For example, if ESA is redefined in a manner that addresses a lot of concerns, probably there need not be any change to other recommendations.

A note: there are arguments flying around if the government has actually implemented the report or not, whether this is a law or not. Some people quote some section of law, other people quote a different section of law. I don't have a damn clue which is what. All I know is that, only after people started getting into the streets that the authorities has woken up and started discussing it. As far as I am concerned, all these arguments are just peripheral.  My critique is not on any notification issued by MoEF, it is on the Kasturirangan report, and it holds whether the final notification is already issued or if it is going to come in another 2 or 4 or 6 months. I don't have a dog in that political race.

A last note:
The funniest takeaway from this whole episode for me is the realization that those living outside India in centralized AC homes, spending their entire weekends shopping in larger than life shopping malls in cities, spending entire day in air-conditioned offices and commenting on facebook claim that they are the people who loves Western Ghats; while those who wake up everyday to work on their land in those hills with vegetables, crops and domestic animals are the enemies of Western Ghats. Wow!!!

A critique of Kasturirangan Report - Part 5

Recommendations 12 through 17

No comments.


Recommendations 18 through 29 (Green incentives)

No comments, although incentivizing organic farming (28) is not an easy task. There is every chance that people will be either inadequately compensated or will end up stopping farming altogether. HLWG can simply state that the Organic outputs should be branded and sold. But who will create the market for these organic output, and how will the farmers access it? There are a lot of implementation hurdles around this recommendation and this can potentially derail a lot of livelihoods. Since this recommendation is vague on its details, I can't comment any further. But that itself is a problem. In principle, I don't have an issue, but I don't see how it can be put into practice without creating livelihood troubles for the people. And should I even talk about the track record of the governments in implementing any incentive scheme successfully?

Recommendations 30 through 36

No comments

A critique of Kasturirangan Report - Part 4

8) All ‘Red’ category industries should be strictly banned. As the list of
industries categorized as ‘orange’ includes many activities like food and fruit
processing, there will not be a complete prohibition on this category. But all
efforts should be made to promote industries with low environmental
impacts.

Now, this is where I have a very serious problem. When I first read this recommendation, I did not think much about it, mainly because I was (as any other gullible Indian) thinking that RED means something really dangerous, hence may be it is okay to let it go. But then, I wanted to know what are these industries. I got a categorization list at the Centure, applicable across India.  Here it is: http://envfor.nic.in/legis/ucp/ucpsch8.html

Now, I tried to figure out a corresponding list at the state level (Kerala for me). Excuse me for my internet skills, I couldn't find one. So, I had to go to the Kerala State Pollution Control Board and look at the actual applications in the last half year 2012 to figure out what could potentially be this list for Kerala.
http://www.keralapcb.org/writereaddata/Consent%20Details%202012.htm

I have to admit that my analysis is not complete in this. But I think whatever I found is good enough to say a few things:

1) Laboratories, clinics or even simple hospitals.
2) Milk processing and Diary farms
3) Slaughter houses and meat processing, chicken farms
4) Mobile towers

Now, I would like to take a pause and go to recommendation 9 & 10 directly:

9) Building and construction projects of 20,000 m2 and above should not be
allowed. Townships and area development projects should be prohibited.

10) All other infrastructure and development projects/schemes should be
subject to environment clearance under Category ‘A’ projects under EIA
Notification 2006. All these projects will be considered by the Central government under Category A.

Let us read these three recommendations together.

I don't need to talk about Clinics/Hospitals, as if you can't understand the fathom of the implication of its absence, you are being inhuman towards those people. Diary is a big secondary income for many of the farmers living in Western Ghats, without which they cannot sustain. Likewise, meat is not only a dietary thing, it is also an income. No more advancement in telecommunication, the next generation will remain a step behind the rest of the country.  Then, the rest of the industries (I have talked about only the common denominators. I am pretty sure the impact of not having the other types of industries will also be huge, but I can't produce any solid reasoning here, that's just my ignorance, please note).

Also, note the vagueness surrounding the Orange category. Another opportunity for bureaucrats to pick up bribes and politicians and other local power holders to make life difficult for ordinary people.

In case of infrastructure development, you need to get approval from the highest of authorities. In a state where even the most important state highways and national highways take decades to build and years to maintain, what chance does a project from an ESA territory hold?

Likewise, you can't have big towns. They can  keep their petty shops, but not entitled to visit a well-developed town. You know why? Because we (the others) want to keep visiting them, and we think they only way we can achieve that is by making them not to do it.

In a nutshell, these three recommendations tells me one thing very straight - the farmers should do ONLY farming. Which is very innocent at first. But, if you think about, you realize that it means another thing - if you are a tribal, you can continue to be a tribal. If you are not a tribal, you have two options: either slowly convert to a tribal, or leave the place. The complete area will grind to a halt slowly over a couple of decades. Some people will chose to stay, but most of the next generation will need to find other places to build their lives.

But where will they go? CITIES. More people, more pollution, more everything. We can all live in a state of endless polluted nirvana. Having got rid of devilish farmers who used to produce environment-nasty crops and feed us, we then become totally dependent on TN/Andhra/Karnataka etc for various things. Then we will keep cribbing that we are not getting vegetables to eat for Onam. We import everything. That requires transportation. But we cant build highways because of increased population density in the lower areas. And we get into a cycle of  chaos. But, you know, all this migration, transportation & pollution is good for environment, because we presumably saved Western Ghats.

My suggestions:

1) It is important for every Keralite to recognize that continued habitation and development in the Western Ghats is a MUST to distribute the extreme population density of the state and to avoid any further load on our social and physical infrastructure with an already broken backbone. A mass immigration (even if it is gradual) is not going to help any environment anywhere.

2) To achieve that, certain basic necessities like the ones I listed above should be exempted in the recommendation #8. The other Red & Orange industries can have special permissions.

3) The restrictions on Infrastructure projects should be further categorized so that things like local roads and important transportation facilities are not constrained.

4) Social infrastructural institutions like educational institutions and hospitals, even if they go beyond the stipulated area, should be exempted and townships that serve such institutions around them should be allowed.

5) If at all we need to bring in further restrictions, the affected areas should be financially compensated. Because they have put in their blood and sweat in that land. They are entitled to the rewards of that effort as much as anybody anywhere. The compensation can come in various shapes, like pension funds or reservations in higher educational institutions or direct cash transfer or anything else. In any case, the implementation should happen after the consent is received from the interested parties, not before that.

A critique of Kasturirangan Report - Part 3

5) There should be a complete ban on mining, quarrying and sand mining in
ESA. All current mining areas should be phased out within the next 5 years,
or at the time of expiry of mining lease, whichever is earlier.

I will leave this recommendation as it is, for now. I do have some serious apprehension about the scope of this blanket statement. I am in no position to even think through this, and my exposure is bare minimum. But, to put my thought simply - If the rest of India is happy to pay more to build their houses, tar their roads or construct their offices and to sit idly on its natural resources, then I don't particularly care.

6) No thermal power projects should be allowed in ESA. Hydropower projects
may be allowed but subject to following conditions: (followed by some conditions, which are irrelevant for this critique)

If India can find other places to build its energy sources (which are already short in supply compared with demand), I am very happy to let this be. Nobody wants to see another mega project anywhere near their vicinity.

7) HLWG recommends that wind energy should be included in EIA notification
and brought under purview of assessment and clearance.

Same as (6).

A critique of Kasturirangan Report - Part 2

2) About 60,000 km2 of natural landscape (approximately 37% of the total
geographical area of Western Ghats Region) has been identified as
Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) by HLWG

Based on my critique of (1), this will stand corrected.

3) MoEF should put the ESA map in the public domain, which will enable
scrutiny and transparency in decisions.

Absolutely no problem at all.

4) HLWG is recommending a prohibitory and regulatory regime in ESA for
those activities with maximum interventionist and destructive impact on the
ecosystem. All other infrastructure development activities, necessary for the
region, will be carefully scrutinized and assessed for cumulative impact and
development needs, before clearance.

I don't even know what this means. I will be surprised if HLWG itself can give more clarity into this. Here is a problem with statements like this: who gets to define "maximum interventionist and destructive" practices? Vagueness is deliberately introduced so that Beaurocrats and Politicians can milk the people to the maximum. CII (Confederation of Indian Industries) always have a typical statement - "Government needs to give clarity in policies, only then investors are going to come in" or something like that. Why is it that clarity is missing in such an important report? Is it because the people in Western Ghats does not wear suit?

A critique of Kasturirangan Report - Part 1

Let me jump straight into each recommendation.

1)  Delineation and demarcation of ecologically sensitive area in Western
Ghats region

I have no problem with this. Of course, if there is a common notion that Western Ghats need to be protected (my ideas about that notion is slightly different, but I respect the notion of the rest of the world), you need to demarcate the areas and bring in some restrictions. How do you demarcate - that's the problem. For example, Kerala is heavily populated, even in the Ghats, unlike other states. The parameters that you apply for Gujarat may not be viable for Kerala. I do not see that Kasturirangan has made any accommodations in that respect. The schematics of ESA identification is given in Page 56. A close observation can immediately tell you that a place very populated, but the biological diversity is very high, is marked as ESA. That is why places like Udumbanchola & Vythiri (more than 400 people per sqkm) came under ESA, while many highly populated places in other states escaped. Reason? The farmers in Kerala maintained the biological diversity when they did their farming (Ignorant peole, they should have eliminated some diversity a few decades back, so that they could have escaped this!!).

Now, here is an interesting thing: Page 96 "The remote sensing derived vegetation maps are not without limitations. For instance under-story plantations (for eg. cardamom) or naturalized forest plantations cannot be discriminated."

What the report essentially is saying that their ESA categorization may not be accurate due to technical limitations. If that is so, it would have been either the panel's or the State government's duty to refine the ESA areas by doing it manually. Why didn't nobody bother? My information is that the farmer's organization has indeed raised this question with MoEF & State government. But nobody acted.

My suggestion: Redraw the ESA by eliminating areas with more than 100 people per sqkm, irrespective of biodiversity. DO NOT PUNISH PEOPLE FOR MAINTAINING THE BIODIVERSITY.

A note on the number 100. I don't know how HLWG came up with that number. It is said - "The
reason that less than 100 person/km2 was chosen because in hilly areas the usual density is<100 persons/km2 (Page 57)." Well, I don't see that as a very convincing logic. But, anyway, I concede that.

A critique of Kasturirangan Report - Introduction

Last few days, I had to get into time consuming exchanges with different people in Facebook regarding the Gadgil committee report & Kasturirangan Report. I find Facebook as a very difficult medium to articulate thoughts lucidly & logically. Hence, this blog where I intend to capture my thoughts around these two reports. Going forward, if any of my friends would like to debate me on this issue, please do so here. I do not intend to respond in Facebook.

I am starting with a statement that I am against implementing both the reports in its current form. I will explain my rationale later. But I am open to the idea that I am wrong. In fact, I will be glad if I am wrong, because that means a good thing for me personally, as I hail from one the places marked as ESA / ESZ-1.

A background on both reports

While the government is now saying that only Kasturirangan report is being implemented, I will take that only with a pinch of salt. That is because, it is NOT an expert committee report. The expert committee report is the Gadgil report. Since the Western Ghats is  now a World Heritage Site (effective July 1st, 2012), India is bound to keep it protected as per a promise given to the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). It was the WGEEP (Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel - headed by Gadgil) report that the Indian representatives in the UN Convention had with them.

The HLWG (High Level Working Group) headed by Kasturirangan was setup to decide a future course of action based on the Gadgil report. In that sense, Kasturirangan report may be considered as one of the many phases of implementing the Gadgil report. It is all constructed and termed in such a vague manner that everybody is confused about both, so that, depending on the political convenience and international pressure, any government at any time can bring up both or part of them anytime. That's the way governments work, right? If you have been to a government office anytime for anything in India, you will know what I mean. If somebody files a case in Supreme Court and the Court asks the Government which is the report that is submitted by experts, Gadgil is the answer (unless MoEF explicitly rejects the report, which it hasn't done yet).

Having said that, by allowing myself to be a fool to trust the Government, I am starting with Kasturirangan recommendations, which is at the center of the storm at present.

Kasturirangan Report

The HLWG report is a 500+ page report in two volumes. The second volume is more or less an addendum, and the recommendations are in the first volume (175 pages). A summary of recommendations are given in pages xii - xxiii, and I will be consolidating my thoughts around these recommendations largely. (I am not attaching the report here, as you can always get it with a simple Google search).

How the reports were written

Even before we begin talking about recommendations, there is a remarkable nature of these reports that needs to be addressed first. Gadgil considers a 1600 km stretch covering more than 1,60,000 sqkm area as Western Ghat. I have read Gadgil saying that any development decision involving the Ghats should have a consent from the Gram Sabhas. But, how many Gram Sabhas he consulted before preparing his report? Of course, I understand that they are Experts in world ecology, hence they must have the divine knowledge to see through every complexity of  nature-human interaction in this rather small area of 160,00 sqkm. Silly me!!!

Unfortunately, their divine knowledge could not see through one thing that permeats the entire human world - Political Power. Everybody who know how humans live, work and spread immediately knew the impact of putting this into practice right away. For example, almost 2/3rd of entire Kerala, about 2.2 crore people out of 3.3. Oh man! We need the Ghats to be preserved, but 2.2 crore people impacted? No way. We need to bring that down to a few millions at the most. It is okay for a few millions to suffer instead of a few hundred millions. We need to find the right guys whose voice can be ignored. Political power sprang into action. Damage containment. Hence HLWG.

It is indeed heart-warming that HLWG found almost the entire district of Idukki as ecologically fragile. No question about it. It warms my heart even more when I understand that one of the few places escaped the ESA tag is Vagamon! Of course, anybody who visited Vagamon would know that it is in Kottayam district and is ecologically more like Kochi than Idukki dist. I would have dreamt up all those misty mountains...I feel like I am one of those scepticists who questioned even our existence; what is the guarantee that this entire world is not just a dream?
Anyway, I, a poor layman whose geological knowledge is limited to the number of continents in the Earth and does not have a clue how government committees work and how they take decisions, take it for granted that both these committee's recommendations are indeed going to save the Western Ghats from the devilish human hands. Praise the Committees!!

In the next post, I will take up the various recommendations in the HLWG report.