India. Independence and Development. Environmental Movements

After independence in 1947 India drew much from the philosophy of nonviolent resistance developed by nationalist Mohandas Gandhi (1869-1948). India drew less from his critique of development and the ecological insights that led to alternatives. India followed a model of a mixed economy with an emphasis on capital-intensive technology in quest of economic self-reliance. Many middle-class Indians hoped to modernize faster than their former imperial masters had let them.

Environmental concern took a generation to emerge fully, although it had older historical roots. Initially dissent was muted, but since about 1970 the environment as an issue has become central to public debate. Not surprisingly, Gandhi's ideas have often been drawn upon by critics of the dominant model of development. The courts, the media, citizens associations, political parties, and scientists have been prominent in a variety of debates, resulting in a series of reports on the environment by citizens' groups.

Environmental Movements. The fate of the forests has been an issue marked by deep divisions. Two attempts to enact legislation on forests in 1982 and 1994 failed due to protests by tribal and other forest-reliant peoples. Often forests are places of habitation, and many of the protesters were marginal agriculturalists for whom forests were a critical supplementary resource.

Underprivileged groups blame industry and urban demand and the commercial orientation of the Forest Department for loss of forest cover. Gender concerns about access and equity have also come into sharp focus. Women have been active in voicing demands for more access to forests and fisheries for sustaining livelihoods.

The expansion of cultivated acreage and the growth of human and livestock populations are cited by those who favor stringent measures to protect remaining forest cover, now less than 11 percent of the landscape. Since 1990 many states, especially West Bengal, have attempted more participatory schemes, with resource sharing with villages.

These schemes appear to work best in regions with less-polarized land ownership. These schemes, known as Joint Forest Management, will evolve into an alternative or merely complement the dominant model of forestry.

About 5 percent of the Indian landmass is set aside in protected areas, often with intact assemblages of flora and fauna. Many areas are former forest or hunting reserves of the British or of the Indian princes. India, despite its population, has more tigers and Asian elephants than any other Asian country. Here, too, legacies of exclusion clash with the call for more participation by local people.

An estimated 3 million people rely on parks and sanctuaries for their livelihood. How increased participation is to be accomplished while retaining biodiversity is still unclear. Alternatives range from microreserves run by communities to resource sharing on the periphery of large parks. Who is to enforce what control regime and how remain contentious issues.

Dams also have been a major issue. After independence they were seen as critical to achieving self-sufficiency in producing food and generating power for industry. The ecological and social costs were to be widely questioned. In 1980 concern about the loss of rain forest stalled construction of a dam in Silent Valley, Kerala. More recently controversy has centered on the displacement of over 100,000 people by large dams on the Narmada River in central India.

Most controversial of these is the Sardar Sarovar dam. Whether and under what conditions displacement was justified raise issues of much wider significance. Most of the displaced are from Madhya Pradesh State, whereas many of the benefits of irrigation will flow to the richer state of Gujarat. Many of the displaced are tribal peoples whose social and political assertion is a significant phenomenon of Indian politics. Although the controversial Sardar Sarovar dam is proceeding after a favorable judicial verdict, the wider debate continues.

The Challenge. The central challenge is simple but daunting: to achieve a better standard of living for 1 billion people and to do so in a sustainable manner via a democratic polity. A growing media and a range of citizens' groups are often in conflict with each other in courts and in public spaces. The century ahead will be one of crises but also one of new opportunities.