CHAPTER - I

ANTECEDENTS HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Antecedents : Historical Background

Environmental problems have been recognized as a serious issue since the middle of

the 20th century. Consequently, it has become a subject matter for intense study and in

the wake of growing awareness, it began to be realized that unless something radical is

done, the world may collapse before the middle of this century. Historical analysis of

the subject reveals that before the 1950s, environmental awareness had been mainly

confined to the conservation movement particularly of mega animals like lion, tiger,

rhino, crocodiles and even some birds and big forest trees. This was the legacy that the

British left for us. Government agencies and Universities developed educational

programmes to teach people about conservation in general - soil conservation in farms

and ranches, forestry and other activities involving natural resources. The concept of

conservation existed in the school curriculum under various names such as Nature

Study, Biology, and Geography etc. These subjects were concerned only with two

dimensions, namely, learning through or from the environment. An important third

dimension, education for environment was missing.' Moreover, the methodology of

teaching these subjects was limited to the imparting of factual knowledge about the

environment. The content was not based on life problems. The problem solving and

interdisciplinary approaches were rlissing.

Phases of development of environmentalism

The history of contemporary environmentalism falls into four phases of

de~elopment.~ The first phase is marked by the post-war concern with Nature up to the

late 1960s. The second phase is characterized by the novel perception of the emergent

'environmental threat', linked to the dominant values of modernization and technological

progress. In the third phase, during .980s, the global environmental challenges became

recognized and the principle of linking development with environment came to be

endorsed by State institutions. In thz 1990s i t acquired greater dimension as post-Rio

environmentalism with wider cultural processes of globalization.

The development of Environmentalism to describe the ways in which the

people express their concern about the state and future of the environment was an

important landmark during this period. It is really a social movement or rather a

loose coalition of like-minded people who take a personal responsibility to leave a

worthwhile environmental heritage for the future generation.' It is founded on a number

of concerns, including a reaction against modem western techno-fix solutions applied

to most environmental problems (e.g. generating energy from nuclear power); a

concern about the welfare of deprived groups of people such as adivasis and

aborigines, the victims of develol~ment; a concern for wider issues of equity and

justice (e.g. disparity in economic: growth and mindless consumption of resources

by northern countries). Other important concerns include taking membership of

environmental pressure groups and campaigning organizations (e.g. Green Peace

Movement), activism in environmental politics (e.g. organized political activities by

environmentalists called "Greens"' to be elected to local, State and national offices

in Western Europe); Green Consumerism i.e., a deliberate attempt to use only

environmentally friendly products such as using paper that is recycled, domestic

recycling of wastes etc.; local environmental activism, adoption of environmentally

friendly life style (e.g. using public rather than private transport, turning to

vegetarianism etc); public debates on wider environmental issues such as nuclear

energy, fossil fuel, renewable energy, global warming and green house effect,

conservation of water and a hole i : ~ the ozone layer, biotechnology hazards, cloning

e t ~ . ~ To tackle such issues, hopefully, people's movements against environmental

degradation have been coming up in all parts of the world.

Spaceship Earth

As early as the 1970s the establishment of many international agencies like

the International Biological Programme (IBP) (1964-1975) and UNESCO generated

popular awareness on environmental problems. The IBP and later the UNESCO Man

and Biosphere Programme (MAB begun in 1971) and the space programme in the USA

23

and former USSR, helped foster an awareness that global scale problems are real and

the earth is finite. Probably prompted by such awareness, in 1965, U.S. Ambassador to

the UN, Adlai Stevenson, in a speech (which was drafted by a prominent environmentalist

Barbara Ward) used the metaphor 'Sp,aceship Earth'.s The idea was strengthened in 1968

when astronauts in Apollo-8 space craft, who travelled around the Moon returned with

photographs of the earth taken from the Moon. The photographs gave the impression

that the earth is just like a small blue marble floating freely in the air. It appears like a

self-contained spaceship on an everlasting journey. Spaceship Earth became an icon of

1960s and 1970s environmentalism.* Such debates and images contributed to the notion

of the earth as a common house, which needs care and maintenance as proposed in

'Only One Earth' by Ward and D u ~ o : ~ (Published in 1972 as a key text to the Stockholm

C~nference).~

1970s: New Dimension - Education for Environment

By this time, the old problem of pollution took a new dimension, i.e., it grew

from a local nuisance to a global menace. For instance, acid rains, one of the most

dangerous types of pollution were found to be contaminating water, acidifies soils,

kills trees, corridors buildings over rnuch of Europe and North America. Emission of

greenhouse gases contributed to global warming and oil leaked into the sea led to mass

pollution of coastal areas. Other glol~al environmental threats such as ozone depletion

were also brought to light. Thus the situation began to change drastically in the seventies.

Soon it was accepted that environmental degradation, if allowed to continue at this rate,

would endanger the existence of hurnan beings. The need of the hour, therefore, is to

have environmentally conscious citizens who are concerned about saving the environment

from disaster. They should have the knowledge about the environment, associated

problems and nature of the crisis, aware of the solutions to these problems and motivated

to work for that. This naturally means change in attitudes and behaviour and a radical

revision of the values of the society we live in which we have deep roots in the culture of

the past few centuries.' Many governmental and non-governmental agencies began to

work throughout the world for the rellization of these objectives. Several national and

* Who is in control of the spaceship Earth? No ore. It controls itself.

24

international conferences were held. Consequently education for environment became

gradually incorporated into the curric:ula through traditional subjects such as science,

geography, and Nature study. And sl~ecifically for the creation of awareness the first

Earth Day was observed in America in 1970 and National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) was passed and Environmetltal Impact Assessment (EIA) established, all in

America in the same year.

National Environmental Policy Act and Environmental Impact Assessment

National Environmental Po1ir;y Act (NEPA), called by some as 'Environmental

Magna Carta' in US was one of the most important developments during this p e r i ~ d . ~

NEPA helped the USA to pioneer a proactive approach to environment and development.

Under the Act, all major federal projects likely to affect the environment required a

pre-project (Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), so that alternatives could be

seen and short and long term problents could be identified. Under NEPA a Council of

Environmental Quality was formed to draw up the annual environmental quality report

and to advise the President on the Stare of the environment. Besides passing the NEPA,

1970 saw the establishment of the IJS Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an

independent body responsible for regulating, co-coordinating and enforcing US

environmental laws and for reviewing the impact statement produced by NEPA and the

declaration of Earth Day (22 April 1970) which encouraged large number of Americans

to demonstrate annually their sympathy for environmentalism.

Earth Day of 1970 : The foundation of modern environmentalism

In the United States, in parti~:ular, Gaylord Nelson, a Senator from Wisconsin,

came up with a strategy in 1969 to ~nobilize national awareness. He announced that

April 22, 1970 be celebrated as Earth Day, when at all locations throughout United

States, citizens would demonstrate for a cleaner environment, and on that day, as many

as 20 niillion Americans are believed to have taken part in demonstrations against

pollution, particularly against the smcg caused by motor car exhausts in American cities?

Today Earth Day is celebrated worldwide every year on 22* April with its goal ofraising

environmental awareness. Festilials, protests, workshops and other activities

emphasizing the importance of environmental education and activism are being held in

25

Kerala too. To a number of peopl~: this day marked the beginning of the modem

environmental movement. Followii~g the Earth Day celebrations held in the United

States, environmental awareness and worldwide support for conservation increased

drastically. Environmental legislation became a major concern. Several important

environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act were passed or

revised and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was established to promote

environmental quality.'O Also official attitudes in all countries seem to have undergone a

considerable change around this period. The American experience showed that everyone

who wanted to express what they felt almut the environment but did not have the opportunity

to do so for years was able to come out with it on Earth Day." It was absolutely amazing.

The suggestion that a day along the lines of Earth Day be organized in Kerala may be

warmly welcomed because Earth Day could be used to create statewide environmental

concern, to project all the environn~ental problems and to highlight what the people

themselves had achieved.

Nature in the Philosophical Tradition of India

Upanishads constituting the earliest literature of India's philosophical traditions

speak of the forest and the environment as organically linked to human existence. This

view was a direct reflection of the life - world of Acharya-Brahmachari who composed

the Upanishads. Life in the forest was the basis of the philosophical contemplation of

Nature. This perception is seen in the: Ramayana and Mahabharata too. But this cannot

be generalized as common to the whole sub-continent, for there existed social

formations of agrarian base all along the river banks of extensive deforestation. The

centrality of biosphere consciousness in the Jain, Buddhist and Ajivika world-views

pervades to some of the later philosophical traditions too. In the Indian philosophical

and mythological traditions, every living being is constituted by five basic elements - "Panchamahabhuta" i.e., sky, air, fin:, water and soil.* The sentient being created out of

these five elements of Nature is the philosophical statement of e~o logy . '~ All the living

world, from the grass to the forests, rivers, lakes, oceans, hills, the birds and animals

* Rabir~d,ur~arl~ Tagore, our culluralseer, succinc) ly observed: " conremporary western civilizarion is built ofbrick, iron ut~d wood. Ir is rooted in the cily. But 111dia11 cbrilizalion has been distinctive in localing the source of degeneration. lare re rial and inreNecrual in rheforesr, not CI the cily India's best ideas have come where man is in communion with the rrees, rivers and lakes, owayji-onr crowds. The r~~der-IyC~gprinciple of Itye i n diversity, of democraticpluralism. thus Deca~rle lheprbzcipie oflndiafl Civilizario~l ".

living in and around them are the natural resources or the constituents of the

Panchamahabhuta at the end. The wtiole living world, the grand cosmos of the resources

comprising the five elements is the common resource of the global family. This concept

is crucial to the ecological balance and well being on this earth. It suggests the organic

relationship, interdependence and continuing exchange amongst the five elements of

the cosmos. The Indian myth and legend through various symbols have established that

these are the elements, which have made Mother Earth. Indians believe that "aperson,

who is engaged in killing creatures, polluting wells, and ponds, and tanks and destroying

gardens, certainly goes to hell".13 'There are examples galore of historical incidents

based on the strong stand taken by the common people of our country forthe protection

of their environment.14 Nature itself'reminds us of humanity's basic unity. The stream

of life running through all organisms is fundamentally the same. The vision of unity

shared by so many of the great philosophers and ancient scriptures like Vedas and

Upanishads and so central to all the great religions is recognized now as an inescapable

scientific fact. Understanding this sense of unity is a powerful stimulus to view and

respect all beings equally. The extreme dimension of the unity is proclaimed in the

vision that God pervades every entity in Nature. (Isavasyam Idam Sarvam) ie, God

made himself visible through the creation.

The Gaia Hypothesis

Of late, this concern for environment, deep rooted in the Indian traditions and

culture, was put forward in the early 1970s as a revolutionary new theory by James

Lovelock, a British Chemist. He called it the "Gaia hypothesis", named after the ancient

Greek Goddess of Earth.15 According to this hypothesis, the planet earth is alive and

operates as a living organism. This concept of the biosphere as a self-directing entity

was developed further by Lovelock in the book "Gaia: A New Lookat Life on Earth"

( 1979) where he considered the ean h as a "diffuse super-organism" and makes explicit

the way in which "the Earth's living matter, air, oceans, and land surface form a complex

system which ...... has the capacity to keep our planet a fit place for life".I6 Gaia is used

by Lovelock as shorthand for the hypothesis that the biosphere is a self-regulating

entity with the capacity to keep our planet healthy by controlling the chemical and

physical environment. Alharva Veda says that the Earth is our Mother (Dharti Mata) or

the Universal Mother. The Indian collcept of Mother Earth, though much older, tallies

to a large extent with the Greek concept of 'Goddess Earth' (Gaia) i.e., is Earth as a

super organism, which is living, dynamic, evolving and continuing. Like all living

organisms, the Earth too shows properties of irritability and response and reacts to

natural human perturbations. The idea that earth itself is a single living pulsating

organism, an enormous being of which we are parts, demands a growing worldwide

concern for its survival." The earth has its own metabolic need and viral processes

which needs to be respected and pre:;erved.

Since the Earth is 'Gaia', a living organism as Lovelock has suggested, naturally

it has a right to live. And the right of the Earth is of a higher order than those of human

beings because it provides the conditions for sustainable life. Respect for life has to

stem from such a fundamental spiritual notion, based on a faith in the right of the earth

and all living beings it supports. Hence the Earth is no longer regarded as just a bundle

of resources for human consumption, but as alive and we and all other fellow beings

are parts of it.18 This insight, exemplified not only in the Eastern philosophical approach

and culture, but also seemingly elident in the lifestyle and traditions of primitive

communities such as tribals, adiviisis and marginal communities of Kerala was a

contribution that the environmental movement in the State could make to the world,

thus demanding greater propagatior~ through ecological communication. Customs and

traditions of Kerala and celebrations of festivals like Onam, Vishu and Christmas also

depict the respect for Nature. There 1s an African proverb, which says: "The Earth is not

ours, it is a treasure we hold for our children and their children". This is a challenge to

environmental education and to our leaders to prove that we are worthy ofthis treasure.

This dimension about the concept of earth has added much to develop a reverential

attitude towards earth in environmental communication.

Periodic warnings about the impending death of the earth as a result ofhuman

misuse have persisted on to our times. The earth's vital signs reveal a patient in declining

health.19 The Spaceship Earth contains all the resources it requires. Its self-regulatory

mecha~~~sms are carefully controlled to suit human life. Lovelock's (Gaia hypothesis)

argue that the Earth has an inbuilt ability to maintain its own equilibrium and to recover

from damage just like any other organism. If any of these conditions change too much

or too fast, the spaceship gets into trouble. This is what is happening to the spaceship

earth today, particularly because the human species is multiplying out of all proportions,

placing greater demands on all systerq~.~O And through pollution and overexploitation,

the natural regulatory mechanisms arc being upset. Thus environmental communication

envisaged through the concept of Spaceship Earth and Gaia hypothesis demands that if

humans do not take care of this ailing planet now, one day life on it will be miserable

and eventually even impossible.

Deep Ecology Vs Shallow Ecology

Deep Ecology, a term introduced in 1972 by a Norwegian philosopher, Arne

Naess, and frequently used in enliironmental discourses is a social and political

movement that calls for a rethinking of our views about the environment. It considers

Nature as having a true 'intrinsic value in every form of life' and views that 'the equal

right to live and blossom is an intuitively clear and obvious value axiom' (Naess, 1973).*'

Hence Nature should be viewed independent of human needs and value humans places

on natural resources. Deep Ecologists criticize those who claim to be protecting the

environment but do very little to bring about fundamental change. Naess calls this as

'Shallow Ecology', which has as it:; central objective 'the health and affluence of the

people in the developed countrie~'?~ Environmental management, according to them

is judged by its usefulness to human interests and is prepared to accept high tech

solutions. In contrast to this human centered view of shallow ecologists, non-

anthropocentric deep ecology calls far fundamental shifts in our attitudes and behaviour

and seeks harmony with nature.

Environmental Organizations of'the 1970s

New international environmental organizations got under way in the late 1960s

and early 1970s. Typical of consc:rvation bodies established in the late nineteenth

century were those concerned with the protection of a natural heritage such as the

Sierra Club in America and the Nati~nal Trust in Britain.23 Other bodies had, at least

initially, a more specialized interest in conservation, for example the ~udubon Society

in the United States and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds in Britain. The

new environmental organizations ,were concerned with issues other than simply

conservation. Among the intematiorial movements, 'Green Peace' and 'Friends of the

Earth' are particularly worth considering, partly because of their subsequent importance

amongst the world's environmental c~rganizations and also because of their methods of

campaigning, which from the very start were different from those of traditional

conservation bodies. Green Peace was founded in Vancouver in 1970. Its very name

indicates its association with the 'peace movements' of the 1960s and initially it was a

small group, which sought to prevent nuclear testing in the Pacific by sailing into the

danger zone.24 By 1989 Green Peacz had established itself as one of the best-known

environmental organizations, with 35 main branches in 22 countries. One of the principles

to which it has been committed is tke equal right of all species to exist and flourish, a

principle affirmed in its forthright advertising campaign of the mid-1980s against the

wearing of fur coats. Friends of the E.arth began in the United States as a splinter group

from the Sierra Club in 1970 and became involved in a large number of environmental

issues in 28 different countries. Like Green Peace, Friends of the Earth has close links

with the anti-nuclear movement.25 It also sometimes adopts direct methods, first hitting

the headlines when some of its activists dumped 1500 throwaway bottles on the doorstep

of Schweppes. Thousands of people have participated in consumer pressure campaigns,

protests against polluting industries, direct action to stop the destruction of irreplaceable

wildlife sites, public meetings to stop nuclear waste dumps, cycle rallies and many more.

In addition, Friends of the Earth has published reports, promoted legislation in Parliament

and participated in public inquiries. 'I'hese organizations were manifestations of the new

environmental movement of the ear1:y 1970s.

People's 'Green Movement' in Kerala

Prompted by these international concerns and in response to mounting

environmental problems in the State, several environmental organizations began to take

30

shape in different parts of eral la as e$ 60s. Hundredw@fch Nan-Governmental

Organizations (NGOs) were formed in t h e ~ ~ ~ ~ i n greater detail in Chapter

, 111. However, the prominent among: them formed during this period for creation of

environmental awareness are Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) founded in 1962;

Socicty for Environmental Education in Kerala (SEEK), 1979; Society for the

Protection of Environment in Kerala ( SPEK), 1990; World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF-

India) Trivandrum Centre, 1969; Centre for Overall Development, Kozhikode, 1989;

Conservation of Nature Trust, Calicut, 1993; Friends of Trees, Kottayam, 1991; One

Earth One Life, Kannur; Prakrithi Sanmkshana Sarnithy, Trivandrum, 1981 ; Alter Media,

Trichur; Integrated Rural Technology Centre (IRTC), Palakkad and so on. Some such

movements have taken the shape of an organized social and political activity consciously

directed towards sustainable use of n;~tural resources, to halt environmental degradation,

to develop environment friendly technology and to bring about environmental restoration

or regenerati~n.~~ Kerala has witnessed the impact of such a persuasive group in 1980s

when a 200 MW hydroelectric dam in the crystal clear Kunthipuzha river in Silent Valley,

a rich treasure house of tropical rain forest was about to come up. A combination of

scientists, environmental activists and the local people put up a strong front against the

project as it was a risk for many rare and endangered species of plants and animals.27

Finally Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had to intervene to stop the ambitious project.*

Limits to Growth - 1972

Almost simultaneously at tnis time, the publication of a few books added new

dimensions to our understanding of'Environment. No doubt, the most influential was

the publication of a book titled The Limits to Growth in 1972.28 It was the result of an

ambitious research project sponsored by the Club of Rome - a group of 70 scientists,

teachers, economists and industrialists from 25 countries - who met regularly from

April 1968 onwards. The study wai launched in 1970 and published in 1972 asLimits

to Growth. The preparation ofthe book was led by a team headed by Dennis Meadows

at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). They developed a dynamic computer

* "In the midst o f darkness, there is a ray o f hop: -the people's movements challenging the policies o f establishments. They are expressing the will o f the people by demonstrating the people's power on the ground, rather than through intellectual exercises in seminars. They areairied against aggression and selfprotection" SundarlolB~huguna -

model to examine how five factors -population growth, agricultural production, natural

resource depletion, industrial production and environmental pollution-interact. The

model was based on trends in these five factors throughout the twentieth century up to

1970 and it enabled forecasts to be made about what the future might hold if these

trends continued. Most run of the model forecast a point within the 2lS'centuly when

serious shortages of natural resources may lead to falling industrial growth, limited

food supplies and a marked drop in the human population caused by pollution, famine,

disease and stress. The central thesis of 'Limits to Growth' that natural resources are

limited and in the long term economic growth and population growth must be curbed - is described as neo-Malth~sian.~~ Malthus was essentially pessimistic, as were the MIT

team who wrote Limits to Growth. (Fig. 1) Followed by this Alvin Tofller's challenging

book Future Shock (1970) and E.E'. Schumacher's famous book Small is Beautiful

(1973) and a few others brought out that the planet and its resources are finite - that

unlimited and indefinite growth and development cannot take place within limited and

finite resources30.*

World model standard run

Figure 1. Limits to Growth predictions of~:lobaipopulafion. resources andpollution based on drxerenr assumptions mode by the MIT tea~~t , using the dynamic computer model. The one summarised here, referred to as the standard run, assumed tlrat declining resources and increasing degradation of the environtnent wouldevenlually result in declines in huntan aspects of the model. A/ierFigure I. 8A in Cunningham. W.P. and B. W. Saigo 41992) Environmenlalscience: a global concern. Wm C Brown Publishers. Dubuque.

* In this book Schumacher warned that the West's oursuit of orofit and develooment had ommoted piant nreanizations. ... ~ncrcascd spec~alintion. economic inefficiency, c;vironme&l damage and inhuman wo;king;ond~ions. The remedies hc olTcrcd includcd Buddhist cconomles. ~ntemied~ate te;hnology (technology wlth a human face), using smaller nurklng units, local lahour and rcsuurcr 2nd rcytect for rcma~nable resources.

Cornucopia and global change

Not everybody accepted Malthus's ideas or the conclusions drawn in Limits to

Growth. The optimists or so-called '(:omucopians' believe that the environment offers

abundant resources. They stress that lechnology and free markers encourage the search

for substitutes for any particular resources that become scarce and that the world

scientific and political community now has the capacity of knowledge, technology and

resources to reverse current needs. This is the essence of sustainable development.

Optimists argue that the Limits to Growth flawed ignoring the ways in which reserves

were defined.3' For many resources, particularly minerals, the definition of reserves

is based more on economic than on physical factors - it is usually based on the amount

of a substance that has been identified and can be profitably extracted under present

conditions (such as technology). Yet this definition itself changes over time as new

technologies are developed, new reserves are discovered, and some existing reserves

become more cost-effective to exploit. For example, global reserves of bauxite

(aluminum ore) rose by 279 per cent between 1950-1970, copper by 179 percent,

chromium ore by 675 per cent and tin by 10 per cent?2 Some scientists argue that,

when allowance is made for anticipaxed population growth and economic development,

mineral reserves are adequate for the next century and that the environmental problems

associated with their exploitation (e g. creation of wastes, pollutants, land take) can be

contained. This assumes that new reserves will be discovered that are recoverable at

cost-effective price@ Fig. 2. But whilst the comucopians see a much rosier hture Total resources

Potential economic

Recoverable resources threshold (riot likely 10 be I

economlc In foreseeable future) i Technolopical .4 threshold

Non-re:overable resources

I (present in the earth but not obtainable with present technology) Limit Of

. . . i crustal High -- Oegref: of geologic assurance --Low abundance

Figure 2. Categories of mineral resources and other natural resources. These categories, based on degree o f geological assurances and economic feasibility, were intended to describe mineral resources, but they could also be modified to describe many types o f lion-renewable resources. Source: Chis Park - The Environmen~ Principle and Applica~ions. London. Roulledge, (1997) P. 13.

3 3

ahead than the neo-Malthusians, the-e is a growing group of people who argue that

most natural resources lie beyond the market place and cannot be replaced by

technological substitute^.'^ The m0r.t important of these resources are soil fertility,

clean fresh water, clean fresh air, unspoiled landscapes, climatic stability, biological

diversity, nutrient recycling and environmental waste assimilative capacity.

Global change perspective

The Limits to Growth viewpoint received a fairly hostile reception in the early

1970s, but its central thesis and emphasis have shaped much environmental thinking

since then. Many environmentalists have argued for a radical move away from economic

growth and exponential change, towards more sustainable and responsible levels and

patterns of consumption. Since the mid-1980s, The Limits to Growth perspective has

been increasingly replaced by a 'global change' perspective, but the two have important

elements in common - both are basecl on quantitative scientific research, both have

been widely adopted, both are nw-Malthusian and both have served simultaneously as

scientific concepts and as environmental movement ideologie~.'~

Stockholm Conference of 1972

The enthusiasm of the Earth Day encouraged other nations to look for effective

ways to handle environmental problems The UNO took the lead. The General Assembly

of the United Nations, way back in 1968, had unanimously agreed to hold a conference

in view of the 'continuing and accelerating impairment ofthe quality of the environment'

due to pollution, erosion, wastes and the secondary effects of biocides or substances

destructive to organism^.'^ The Earth Day provided an added impetus. Thus the 'United

Nations Conference on Human Environment' took place in Stockholm, Sweden from

June 51h to June 16, 1972 to discuss th(: ways in which member nations of the United

Nations could work together to protec: the environment. It provided a focal point for

the gathering of environmental concerns of 1960s.*

There were three pans to the work of the Conference: ie, to produce a 'Declaration of the Human Environment' stated in 26 principles, to produce an action plan and to eitablish new U.N agencies to oversee the actioa.

Besides specialized agencit:~, representatives from 1 13 countries attended the

Conference. However, apart from the host Olaf Palme of Sweden, the only world leader

of sign~ficance who attended the conference was Indira Gandhi. Many in the Third

World were initially sceptical, if not hostile, to the new devotion to the environment

displayed by the affluent. Theirprclblem was the group deprivation ofthe multitudes

rather than too much industry. Shaniy towns where insanitary conditions imperil health

and human dignity, forests razed and topsoil destroyed by the desperate provoked

discussion. Hence, the spokesmen for the poor countries observed that environmental

problems are a reflection of povc:rty. Indira Gandhi's intervention brought this

hndamental truth when she declared that "poverty and need are the greatest polluters"."

The effect was that the horizon of environment was expanded to include social, economic

and ethical aspect too. While representatives from the developed countries, in particular,

worked to create new institutions for monitoring global environmental trends, those of

the Third World hoped for significant new assistance to help wipe out social poverty

without needless damage to ecosystems. Some of the representatives of Brazil at

Stockholm, for example, characterised the hue and cry about pollution as a plot to

hamper the industrialization ofthe South. However such debates are rarely heard today.

Impact of Stockholm Conference

The Stockholm conference: had four major effects. First, it consolidated an

emphasis on human environment and the need for rational management of world's

resources. Secondly, it sought to connect environmental issues with development issues

- the inclusion of less developed countries being a significant feature of the conference.

It recognized the role of NGOs as the key players, and initiated the idea of observing

World Environment Day on June 5Ih every year.* Lastly it led to the creation of the

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), a body devoted to generating global

solution to global problems. However " it was agreed that the aim of the action would

have to be the raising of the standard of ecological health of the planet" by improving the

physical and spiritual qualities of our relations to the earth. Third World presence at

Stockholm in 1972 was prompted as much by the fear that development aid might be

'Ordinary people to play extra ordinary role in ccnserving the environment

sacrificed to ecological values as by ;i genuine concern for biospheric environmental

p~otection.'~ Yet the gem of environmental concern was carried home by some delegates

and began to spread among the better-educated members of Third World Societies.*

The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, which met at

Stockholm in 1972, marked a watershed in international relations. It legitimized

environmental policy as a universal concern among nations and so created aplace for

environmental issues on many national agendas where they had been previously

unrecognized. In comparison with other UN conferences, the tangible results of

Stockholm have been s~bstantial.'~ Yet the growth of international environmental

cooperation during the 1970s and thereafter is an aspect of a larger social transition. It

is an expression of a changing view of ra&d's relationship to the earth. Social scientists

have called this view of human life on imth the "new environmental paradigm".40

Post -Stockholm Waves

A political surge ofpost-Stockholm activity continued for several years thereafter,

losing impetus following the Arab Cjil Embargo of 1973. Several important treaties

were adopted and national legislation enacted. By 1989 at least thirty-seven countries

had written environmental protecticm into their basic constitutional laws. In many

instances, however, these constitutional provisions were mere rhetoric with little force

or effect. Moreover, economic and technocratic interests, caught off guard by the

unforeseen burgeoning of the en1iironmental movement, regrouped to mount

counteractive strategies. Even so, an.ilyses of public opinion showed little diminution

of environmental concern. By the mid 1980s a second wave of international

environmentalism began to mount, propagated by a series of widely publicized

environmental disasters (e.g., Bhopal, Chernobyl, ExxonValdez) and agrowingconsensus

among scientists about threats to the stratospheric ozone layer and to the global climate."'

National policies, like social learning tend gradually to reveal the birth of an awareness

that suddenly reaches a point of explosive action, then "plateaus" with some fallback,

only to upsurge again in a new wave of c~mrnitment."~ If the thesis of this introduction

* Studies like the Limits to Growth reoort to the Club of Rome (1972) reinforced the ooinions of those who believed 11131 nldjur restmclurlng of industrial econt~m~cs tias neLesiary lo prevent thcircollapse. These ~ntinlations ofdisaster u~,rr . 1111r1dllv \ ~rwed u ~ t h scepricism h) pol.ric; I elltes SCI-called Third World or devcloprng countncs.

is correct, an environmental policy today is responding to a climacteric rather than a

crisis and we should not expect a reversion of public attitudes and policies to former

perceptions. Yet there is a long rcad to travel before a politics of the planet earth

becomes reality.

The World Environment Day

As a direct outcome of Stockholn~ Conference, the United Nations General

Assembly initiated the idea of obselving World Environment Day on June 5th every

year to mark the anniversary of the Stockholm C~nference.~' The UNGA established

this day in 1972 as an occasion for the world community to come together for the

protection of our Mother Earth. It i:; visualized as a people's event with Government,

individuals and community groups organizing countless activities to improve the

environment. These include clean up campaigns, tree planting, street rallies, bicycle

parades, green concerts, essay competitions in schools, recycling efforts and so much

more. In many countries, this annual event is used to enhance political attention and action.

Heads of States, Prime Ministers anti Ministers of environment deliver statements and

commit themselves to the care for the Earth. World Environment Day is also celebrated

as a multimedia event, which inspires thousands ofjournalists and broadcasters to report

enthusiastically or critically on the e:lvironment. For academicians, it is an intellectual

event to organize and participate in seminars, round table meetings and symposia. World

Environment Day thus provides a unique opportunity to mobilize environmental

communication and action througli out the world. Each year, UNEP, the agency

responsible for co-coordinating Woi.ld Environment Day activities selects a city as the

main venue for the international celebrations. At the heart of these celebrations is the

belief that every individual human being has the right to enjoy clean air, pure water and the

benefit of our biological diver~ity.~ Each year, the World Environment Day also selects

a special theme to address humanity's complex relationship with Nature.* In 2004, the

theme was 'Wanted! Seas and Oceans Dead or Alive' and the main events were held in the

city of Barcelona, Spain.

* The theme for the year 1998 was " For Life on Earth, Save our Seas" and the theme for 1999 was "Our Earth- Our Future - Just Save it". In the year 2000 the theme was 'The Environment Millennium - Time to Act, in 2001, it was 'Connect with the World Wide Web of Life", and in the year 2002, the theme was 'Give Earth a Chance'. The theme for 2003 was " Water -Two billion people are c ying for it".

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP -1973)

After the 1972 UN Conference, plans for the establishment of the UNEP were

presented to the Assembly in a rescdution sponsored by 19 nations. The Assembly

adopted the resolution and agreed to set up the headquarters in a developing nation."'

On January I"', 1973, the UNEP officially went into action from an office inNairobi,

Kenya. The UNEP encourages international co-operation in the efforts to stop pollution

and preserve Earth's natural resourcc:s. It monitors world pollution problems and help

world communities find solutions. In addition, the UNEP reviews the effects any

international environmental projects might have on developing nations, such as additional

financial costs, to ensure that resources or funds will be made available to help those

nations. It also helps member nations by providing education and training in areas such

as nature conservation and control of pollution to both governmental and non-

governmental organizations and the Ei~vironmental Liaison Centre in Nairobi developed

a network of 6,000 non-governmental groups that deal with environmental issues. Films,

videotapes and colour photos are lent to organizations that promote environmental

awarenesd6. *

Earth Watch and Global Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS)

Through the project 'Earth Watch' and its foundation 'Global Environmental

Monitoring System' (GEMS), the LNEP acquires data about world environmental

problems to provide early warning of any impending nature to the international

community and to ensure that those problems receive quick and appropriate action.

GEMS, which went into action in 197 5, has run many projects, including monitoring of

climate change, health problems, long range transportation of pollutants and ocean

activity. The Global Environmental Monitoring System aims to meet the demand for

knowledge about the environment and the impact of human activities. In 1984, GEMS

assessed damage to the ozone layer, and in 1985 it set up a world conference on

chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's)."' Although UNEP has sponsored numerous successful

activities, it has not become the powe+ful global force as it could have. For when their

* Such films as 'The State of the Planet' and 'Water - A Vital Resource' are available in a variety of languages. In 1984 UNEP shot 'Seeds of despair' a filmabout desenihcation in Ethiopia. This film brought out world wide fund raising efforts to help the starving people there. 'Our Plonef' the bimonthly magazine of UNEP provides up-to date information on e~lvironmentally sustainable developme~lt programmes.

immediate economic and political interests were affected, national governments have

proved unwilling to grant significant powers on international issues.

Multilateral environmental agreements

One area in which govemrlents and other stakeholders recorded qualified

successes in the 1970s was wild life conservation. This was achieved through a

combination of legal actions at the global level which were (and still are) enforced at

the global level with variable effectiveness. The foundation for some ofthese successes

was laid by multilateral environmer~tal agreements such as the 1971 Convention on

Wetlands of International Importance, especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ram~ar)."~ Held

in the little Iranian town of Ramsar i r ~ 197 1, the convention was the first of the modem

instruments seeking to conserve natural resources on a global scale.49 While its main

focus was initially the conservation of waterfowl and their habitat, it now also deals

with water quality, food production, general biodiversity and all wetland areas including

salt water. As a result more than 1100 areas, covering 87.7 million ha, are currently

designated Ramsar sites, enhancing wild life conservation in different regions (Ramsar

Convention Bureau 2001).50 Out of the 19 Ramsar Sites in India, three are from Kerala,

all of which were designated in November 2002. These are the Vembanad -Kol,

Ashtamudi and Sa~thamkotta.~' The former two are saline wetlands and the latter, a

fresh water wetland. Another significant development was the 1972 Convention

Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World

Heritage).sz The impact has been gre*~ter awareness of the importance of these sites for

both present and future generations. It was followed by the 1973 Convention on

International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) The

convention controls and lor bans international trade in endangered species including

5000 animals and 25000 plant specil:~. (CITES Secretariat 2001).53

The Cocoyoc Declaration

Equally important in environmental communication at the global arena was the

Cocoyoc Declaration, when a sympc~sium of experts chaired by the late Barbara ward,

was held in Cocoyoc, Mexico in 19 74. Organized by UNEP and the United Nations

Commission on Trade and Development (IJNCTAD), the symposium identified the

economic and social factors, which lead to environmental deterioration. The Cocoyoc

Declaration- the formal statement issued by the symposium - was influential in changing

the attitudes of leading environmental thinkemS4 What was said at the Cocoyoc

foreshadowed the first paragraph of the World Conservation Strategy published in 1980

and was restated in GEO-2000 (Global Environmental O ~ t l o o k ) . ~ ~

'The combined destructive imp.icts of a poor majority struggling to stay alive and an affluent minority coniuming most of the world's resources are undermining the very means by which all people can survive and flourish' (UNEPiUNCTAD 1974).

Further the Cocoyoc Declaration illustrates that the 'problem today is not one

primarily of absolute physical shortage but of economic and social maldistribution and

usage'.s6 The Cocoyoc Declaration ends:

"the road forward does not lie through the despair of doomwatching or through the easy optimism of silccessive technological fixes. It lies through a careful and dispassionate ;~ssessrnent of the 'outer limits', through cooperative search for ways to achieve the 'inner limits' of fundamental human rights, through the buildmg of social structures to express those rights, and through all the patient work of devising techniques and styles of development which enhance and preserve our planetary inheritance".

Energy Crisis of 1973-1974

Between 1973 and the early 1980s, concem focused on the Energy Crisis

although attempts were made to review environmental threats. In 1973-1974 the

Organization of Petroleum Exportkg Countries (OPEC) raised their oil prices, after

decades of generally declining commodity and energy process, causing widespread

concern and difficulty. The crisis in the Persian Gulf region demonstrated the oil

market's vulnerability. Faced with rising fuel export bills, many low developing countries

increased their exploitation of natur;al resources and had little to spend on things like

environmental management, family planning and social welfare and had to depend on

foreign b o ~ ~ o w i n g . ~ ' However, there is now less concem about energy supplies than in

the 1970s. Alternatives to petroleum seem feasible and are gradually being developed

or revived. The contribution of other renewable energy sources, including hydro, solar,

nuclear and geothermal electricity i:; expected to double.58 Nevertheless, the world

still depends on oil and much comes from regions vulnerable to conflicts. An energy

crisis could thus arise before resource crisis are established and could trigger warfare

with associated environmental damage with resultant pollution from burning oil fields

as in Kuwait following Gulf War of 199 1 and recent Iraq war of 2003.

The UNESCO-UNEP International Environmental Education Programme

(IEEP) 1975.

In response to the recomrner~dations of the Stockholm Conference, UNESCO

and UNEP lunched an International Environmental Education Programme (IEEP) in

1975. The main aims of IEEP were exchange of information and experiences, research

and experimentation, training of personnel, curricula and material development and

international co-operation in the field of environmental educati01-1.~~ As part of the

activities of the newly formed UNESCO-UNEP International Environmental Education

Programme, two other conferences, the first in Belgrade (1975) and the second at

Tbilisi (1977) were hosted.60

The purpose of the Belgrade Conference was to draft concepts of a vision for

environmental education. The Belgrade charter proposed a number of guiding principles

of environmental education pr~grarmnes.~' The charter also stressed that environmental

education should be a continuous life long process, be interdisciplinary in approach,

consider the environment in its totality, emphasize active participation in preventing

and solving environmental problems. examine major environmental issues from a world

point of view giving due importance: to regional differences and promote the value of

local, national and international co-operation in the solution of environmental problems.

Two years after the 'Belgrade Workshop', UENSCO in cooperation with UNEP

organized the first Inter - Governmental Conference on Environmental Education at

Tbilisi, USSR in 1977. It brought together representatives from government as well as

non-government agencies to discuss 3nd recommend appropriate measures to promote

environmental education at all levels. The Tbilisi Conference reinforced the major

goals of environmental education, which were, to develop awareness, knowledge and

understanding, social values and attitudes, skills, ability to evaluate and a sense of

responsibility and urgency among the: world population about the ecological, economic,

political and social interaction and interdependence in the environment and their

Other major milestones in the further development of environmental education

programme from 1980s upto World Summit (WSSD) 2002 making the third phase of

environmentalism include - IUCN World Conservation Strategy (l980), Our Common

Future (1988), Earth Summit (1992) and Agenda21; UNESCO Thessalonica Declaration

( I 997), Earth Summit +5 (1997) an6 the World Summit on Sustainable Development

(WSSD) held at Johannesburg in Sel~tember, 2002.

The World Conservation Strategy - 1980

A sophisticated approach to environment and development was well reflected

In the World Conservation Strategy, published in 1980 by UNEP jointly with the World

Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and i he International Union of Conservation of Nature

and Natural Resources (IUCN).63 It wxs a major step towards conservation that provided

guidelines for the management of the earth's living resources. The strategy recognized

that addressing environmental probiems calls for long-term effort and the integration

of environmental and developmental objectives. The document was effectively a

prospectus for environmental conservation with a sharp focus on the need to protect the

Nature and natural resources. In its statement ofobjectives, it goes far beyond the usual

conservation manifesto: its declared ;;oals are to maintain essential ecological processes

and life support systems, to presewe genetic diversity and to ensure the sustainable ., utilization of species and ecosystems, which support millions of rural communities as

well as major industries. As the strategy declares, 'The combined destructive impacts of

a poor majority struggling to stay alive and an affluent minority consuming most of the

world's resources are undermining tile very means by which all people can survive and

The provisions of the 'Tbilisi Declaration on thc: role, objectives and characteristics of environmental education' has rcceived wide acceptance internationally and hits provided a useful foundation for continued action.

f l o ~ r i s h ' . ~ ~ AS the interdependence of environment and development became

increasingly clear, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the World Charter

for Natuve, bringing attention to thc intrinsic value of species and ecosystems (UN

1 982).65

World Commission On Environment And Development (WCED) - 1987

A few years later, in 1987, the United Nations appointed a World Commission

on Environment and Development (WCED), chaired by Mrs. Gro Harland Brundtland,

the then Prime Minister of Norway.66 The Commission produced the now famous report

"Our Common Future" commonly -eferred to as the Brundtland Report. With this a

new realization was dawned, that human race has no hture without a common future.

The report stressed that unless we make development in all countries ecologically

sustainable; there will not be future for mankind. The axis of the debate thus switched

firmly from Nature conservationperse, to sustainable development of all the Earth's

resources. Earlier, similar conclusions were arrived at by commissions headed by

Willy Brandt and Olaf Palme, who talked of problems of common crisis and common

security facing all mankind. The Unrted Nations was keen to follow up the Brundtland

Report and to implement its recomniendations. In 1989 it announced that plans were

being made to hold a major international conference on Environment and Development

in 1992, which Brazil offered to host. A series of preparatory meetings was held between

1990 and 1992 in various countries, at which governments, non-government

organizations (NGOs) and expert scientists discussed and largely reached agreement

on a series of basic documents which could be formally debated at Rio.

Awareness through accidents and disasters

Besides new discoveries, the 1980s also saw a range of catastrophic events that

left a permanent mark both on the environment and on the understanding of its connection

to human health. In 1984, a leak from a Union Carbide plant left 3000 people dead and

20,000 injured in Bhopal (Diamond, S. 1985)." The same year, up to 1 million people

starved to death in Ethiopia. In 1986, the world's worst nuclear accident happened as a

reactor at the Chemobyl nuclear power plant exploded in the Ukrainian Republic of

Soviet Union.68 The 1989 spill 01' 50 million litres of oil from the Exxon Valdez

supertanker into Alaskas's Prince William Sound demonstrated that no area, however

remote and 'pristine', is safe from the impact of human activities. While the number of

geophysical disasters has remained tairy steady, the number of hydromateriological

disasters ( such as droughts, windstorms and floods) has increased. These events often

have impacts that transcend national boundaries and have drawn attention worldwide to

the dangers of mismanagement. 'A disaster is a serious disruption of the hnctioning of

society, causing widespread human, material or environmental losses which exceed

the ability of affected society to cope on its own resources' (UNDHA 2001)69

Throughout the world such small and large accidents and disasters, both man made and

natural including the Orissa cyclone ~2f 1989 and the earth quakes in Kerala in January

2001 are still occurring. All disasters although devastating have an educative value in

the sense that they are creating awareness among the public about the adverse impact

of human interference with Nature and the necessity for a workable disaster

management programme for the State. The latest in this series is the Tsunami disaster

of 261h December 2004 triggered by a massive undersea earth quake killing lakhs of

people in India, Sri Lanka and South East Asia. In Kerala alone the death toll rose to

more than 150 and rendered many

The Rio- Earth Summit - 2002

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (WCED) or

the Earth Summit held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil between 3 and 14 June 1992 was designed

to raise awareness on environmental issues." It was the largest environmental event

held, with over 170 nations participating, of which 1 14 were Heads of Governments.

Other participants included representatives of UN organizations, NGOs and the media.

The purpose of the Summit was to address such events as Biodiversity, Global Warming,

Sustainable Development and relatior~ships between developed and developing nations

that relate to environmental matter:;. The key outcomes of the Earth Summit are

incorporated in five formal documen1.s - two conventions, two statements of principle,

and an action progran~me.'~ The Con.ientions are: -a Convention on Climate Change - (Global Warming Convention) - signt:d by 154 governments, a commitment by nations

to reduce greenhouse emissions by the year 2000, and eventually halting global

warming and a Convention on Biodiversity - (Biodiversity Convention) an agreement

designed to preserve plant and anim2.l life. This was signed by all participants except

the United States. It calls on nations to list species to be preserved and to develop

strategies to conserve and use biological resources (the United States refused to

sign because its language deemed unacceptable). There was also a Statement on Forest

Principles, i.e., a statement relating to the protection ofthe world's forests. It includes

important principles on replanting, establishing new forests and protecting the rights

of indigenous people. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development - a

general statement of principles governing worldwide policy on the Environment and

Development, including the rights $of States to control their own natural resources

and their obligation not to damage their environment." Amongst other things, it

recommends the precautionary principle, internalization of environmental costs, use

of environmental impact statements and the polluter - pay principle. Agenda 21 - an

action plan for environmental protc:ction and sustainable development (the action

programme) clearly defines its overall objectives as

"poverty alleviation and fi l l and sustainable employment, which contribute to a - - safe, clean and healthy environment - the working environment, the community and the physical environment and insists that workers should be full participants in the implementation and evaluittion ofactivities related to Agenda 2

Although the last three agreements reached at the Earth Summit are non-binding

(governments are not legally obliged 1.0 implement what they propose), they constitute a

moral commitment that governments will find difficult to ignore.**

Despite the huge amount of media coverage enhancing international

communication on global environmental issues, the Rio Summit evoked a mixed

reaction. Environmentalists, from dzveloped countries hailed, the conference as the

'last chance to save the planet', while delegates from developing countries saw it as an

* Agenda 2 1 is a national and international 'blue 11rint for action' on environment and development, an agenda for the 21" century. It is over 800 pages long and contains 40 chapters, each of which focuses on a specific theme and is divided into programme areas setting out goals, 3ctivities and provisions on funding and implementation.

** The Rio Earth Summit, described by some as 'the biggest show on Earth', was a record-breaker in many ways. In response to an urgent call by the UN General assembly to formulate " a global agenda for change", 172 countries were represented and took part. The summit at the end was attended by 120 Heads of State, making it the largest ever gathering of world leaders.

opportunity to redress long-standing; economic grievance^.?^ Supporters argue that,

although there was wide criticism from media and environmental pressure groups, the

conference marked a welcome change in international political attitudes towards the

environment. They also applaud the recognition formally given at Rio of the need to

tackle over consumption in industrialized states and poverty and resource scarcity in

the developing world. However, critics argue that throughout its course, the Earth

Summit debate was preoccupied witk immediate practical and political issues and little

attention was given to more fundamerltal concerns such as the links between population,

resources, environment and development, and the need to work towards social, economic

and ecological ~ustainability.?~ They also point out that the legal agreements signed at

Rio are relatively weak and lack bind~ng commitments and time tables. While UNCED

delivered an impressive number of international agreements on a variety of topics, it

hardly began to address the fundamental driving forces of global environmental change

such as trade, population growth and institutional change. On balance, although some

aims are not achieved at Rio, it was an important step on the long-term path towards

environmentally sustainable development. While Agenda 2 1 is not legally binding, it

is based on political and moral commitments from those who signed it.

Monitoring and Analysis of the Environment

One hallmark of environnlental research during the 1990s has been the

development of new technologies, procedures and protocols for collecting, analyzing,

interpreting and reporting environmental information. The development of new

approaches and technologies such as Geographical Information System (GIs), Remote

Sensing, Simulation Modeling and Knowledge based expert systems is opening up

new analytical possibilities particularly for monitoring environmental quality and

environmental change across the entire globe?? Such analysis relies heavily on poweh l

computers, which are used to store and manipulate databases and to run complex

predictive models.

International Conventions Aimed a t Solving Global Environmental Problems

As an after effect of Rio Conference, several international conventions and

conference were held, the chief among them being the Framework Convention on

Climate Change - Berlin and its Aftermath (1992); the Montreal Protocol -an example

of successful Environmental Policy (1987); the Convention on the Law of the Sea -

Towards the Global Protection of the Seas (1 994); the Desertification Convention - A

First Step towards the protection ol' the soils (1994); the Biodiversity Convention

( 1992)and the Protection of Forests: Protocol or Convention.

The signing of the Frame Work Convention on Climate Change at the UN

Conference on Environment and Development at fro de Janeiro in 1992 and its subsequent

coming into force were a major step towards a global climate policy. '' The international

community declared through this convention that it is determined to pursue a global policy

to protect the climate.* The convention for protecting the global climate has meanwhile

been ratified by majority of the nations of the world by now. The significance of the

Conference lies in the institutionalization of the climate policy process, the establishment

of a legal W e w o r k and some genera principles. Further steps, especially binding targets

and schedules for the reduction of green house gases, will have to be specified at subsequent

conferences of the parties.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), since its foundation,

has been concerned with the protection of the ozone layer. A major step towards this

direction was the 'Vienna Convention for the Protection of Ozone Layer', which sought

to minimize human destruction of the ozone layer, mainly by reducing the production

and emission into the atmosphere ~ ~ ' C F C S . ' ~ It was initially signed by 22 countries in

March 1985. Just two months after thc Vienna Convention, the British Antarctic Survey

released the first publication of scientific evidence for the ozone hole over the

Antarctica (May 1985).'' Supplementary to the Vienna Convention, negotiations on

saving the ozone layer protocol proceeded remarkably quickly and as a result on 16,

September 1987, signing of the "Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the

Ozone Layer" was held. 46 countries signed the Montreal Protocol immediately.**

* "The ultimate objective of this Convention is to a:hieve stabilization of green house gas concentration in the atn~osphere at a level that would prevent dangerousanthropogenic interference's with the climate system. Sucha level should be achieved within a time framework suficient tc~ allow ecosystems toadapt naturally to climatechange, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner". (Johnson, 1993)

** In 1995, the UN General Assembly declared 16 September as the International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer, and the signing of the Montreal Protocol has been commemorated this way in each year.

The Protocol came into effect on January 1, 1989 and by November 1994 it had been

ratified by 148 states

The Montreal Protocol (1987) was the first global treaty over their economies

in order to protect the global environment. It called for the manufacture of CFCs to

stay at 1986 level until 1989. By 1994, manufacturing levels were to drop by 20% and

by 1995, levels should decrease by a2other 30% and by half by 1999. The Montreal

Protocol was the fruit of truly collaborative global efforts. Although UNEP provided

the impetus, it was the contributions of many others. The achievements ofthe Montreal

Protocol have been con~iderable.~' A few are - China and India, who declined to sign

the agreement in 1987, have ratified it in 1990. By 2004, 164 countries including the

US have ratified it, 1 18 of which are developing countries. The diminishing worldwide

consumption of ODS - nearly 75% during the last 7 years - has led to a simultaneous

decline in the growth rate of thesc: substances in the atmosphere. The protocol

accelerated the evolution of the concept of sustainable development with a mechanism

for protecting the ozone layer that is effective, equitable and dynamic. Environment

friendly technology transfer from industrialized countries to developing countries is a

prerequisite for this.

At the heart of the Montreal Protocol lies the control measure it imposes on

the production and consumption of oxone depleting substances (ODS). Article 2 of the

agreement defines phase out schedules for the various categories of These

have been progressively tightened with time through the agreements reached in London

(1 990), Copenhagen (l992), Vienna (1995), Montreal (1997) and Beijing (1999). In

accordance with these schedules, the bulk of ODS were phased out completely in

industrialized countries by the end of 1995. The remaining categories are scheduled

for total phase out by 2002 (bromock loromethane), 2005 (methyl bromide) and 2030

(FCFC's). However, developing countries have longer phase out periods. Developing

countries with overstrained econon~ic resources cannot afford to install new ozone

friendly technologies that do not use CFC's. To move directly from polluting

technologies to new environmentally sound methods, a variety of international

technology transfer mechanisms will be needed, including technical training, trade

incentives, joint ventures and multi iind bilateral a~sistance.~' A multilateral ozone

fund totaling 5 10 million for 1995-1996 was set up to support developing countries

implement the Montreal Protocol. A new pilot programme, the Global Environment

Facility (GEF), exists to give grants and low interest loans to help developing countries

protect and manage the environment, ozone layer protection being one of its specific

goals.84 However, there is also concern that obsolete CFC using technologies could be

dumped on developing countries.

The Convention on the Law of the Sea - 1994 (UNCLOS)

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to which

Germany acceded on October 14, 1994, followed by numerous other industrialized

countries, came into effect on November 16,1994. This convention, which according

to German Government represents the 'most important legal instrument of the United

Nations to date', provides a comprehensive regime for all types of use of the seas and at

the same time, an international 'constitution for all marine regions'. November 16,1994

thus also represents a turning point in marine environment protection, one of the focal

points of global environmental policy. Described by the UN Secretary General as one of

the 'greatest achievements of this century', one of the most definitive contributions of

our era' and 'one of our most enduring legacies', it provides a range of precedents and

often-salutary lessons.85 The primary problem of marine area constitutes the 3 types of

utilization functions of the sea. Environmental damage through transport functions of the

seas, impairment of the disposal hnction of the seas through terrestrial sources of

emissions and the dumping of various substances and change to the resource function of

the sea, particularly through over exploitation of the living resources. These three types

(transport function, disposal function and resource function) of use have caused

considerable damage to the marine ecosystem in this century, damage that is now having

a feed back effect on humanity. Living marine resources are severely threatened by over

fishing and pollution and the impairment of marine ecosystems will increase the

greenhouse effect as the seas are affected in their role as store and sink for carbon dioxide.

There are seven main threats to marine environments- shipping, dumping of

wastes, discharge from land, over fishing, mineral exploitation, coastal development

and climate change. The classic exaniple of marine pollution in public perception is

pollution through maritime transport b y supertankers, which pollute the sea particularly

by discharge of oil and deposit of wastesg6The first legally binding instrument with

universal regulatory application for thc: protection of an environmental medium against

pollution dates back to 1950's when numerous shipping nations agreed to the 1954

London 'Convention for the Prevention of the Pollution of the Sea by Oil (OILPOL).

The regulatory mechanism of OILPOL, however, turned out to be impractical. After

several revisions of the OILPOL convc:ntion, there followed a fundamental reformation

of the international regulations on shipping related sea pollution in the 1973

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MHRPOL),

London, which went into effect in 1983, and has been ratified by 85 countries accounting

for over 92% of the World's shipping tonnage)87.* Terrestrial source of emissions on

land is responsible for 7040% of the total pollution of the oceans. Dumping of toxic

substances and radioactive wastes from special ships represents a specific case of land

leased marine pollution that has been systematically carried out as a form of disposal

for industrial wastes or sewage sludge in the past two decades. Dumping of mercury,

cadmium, various types of mineral oil, biological and chemical warfare agents, highly

radioactive substances as well as biodegradable substances have been banned since

1972, because of their special danger for marine organisms. Over Exploitation of

Resources, which is a 'Common herirage of human kind' through marine mining and

fishing and whaling operations and the introduction of new fishing methods since the

beginning of the 20th century have thazatened fish stock with over e~ploitation.~~

The Desertification Convention - 1994

On July 18,1994 representatives from over 100 States met in Paris and reached

an agreement on the text for a 'UN Ccnvention to Combat Desertification in Countries

Experiencing Serious Drought andlor Desertification', referred to henceforth as the

* Other Conventions in this connection are Conven ion on the Protection of Human Life at Sea (SOLAS) of 1974, the Convention on lnternatisnal Rules for Preventing Collusion at Sea (COLREG) of 1972, the Convention on Standards for Training, Issuing Qualifications and Water Duy for Ship's Crews of 1978 and the International Convention onoi l Pollution Preparedness Response and Cooperaticn, London 1990, went into effect in May 1995.

so

'Desertification Convention'. The objective of the Convention was to combat

desertification and mitigate the effects of drought in countries experiencing serious

drought and desertification, particulai~ly in Africa, in the framework of an integrated

approach, which is consistent with Agenda 21. The Convention has created important

political conditions by defining basic requirements for combating desertification.

Among others, these include increasing efficiency through bilateral and multilateral

cooperation, exchange of data and mutual information between donors, public

participation, strengthening support through transfer of research and technology, taking

local conditions into consideration and providing for active participation of affected

countries. Some have expressed worries that the Desertification Convention possesses

a lower intemational status than the Climate Change Convention or the Biodiversity

Convention." One reason for this in~pression is that there is little public attention to

desertification in the industrialized cl~untries. If public awareness is to be raised, the

connections between desertification, poverty and political crises must be rendered

more visible, so that the intemational community should get involved as in the case of

Somalia, Rwanda etc.

The Biodiversity Convention

The Convention on Biological Diversity or the Biodiversity Convention is the

first intemational agreement with binding intemational force that applies a trans-

sectoral approach to the protection c ~ f global biodiversity (UNEP-1992), rather than

the narrow sectoral approach of previous conventions. The objective of the Convention

is not simply that of conservation, but also the sustainable use of its resources by

appropriate access to genetic resourc:es, transfer of technology and finance, as well as

relevant transfer of technol~gies?~ 11 confirms the principle of national sovereignty of

the States over their natural resources and extends this to biological diversity. In addition,

however, i t regulates the conditions for access to genetic resources by establishing a

basic framework. International action measures to protect biodiversity can take the

form of multilateral treaties, intem,3tional policy, legal assistance and international

aid. Although the evolution of multilateral treaties has been uncoordinated, some of

them play a powerful role in the pratection of biological diversity - especially the

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna (CITES), the

Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar) and the Convention

Concerning the Protection of the Wcrld Cultural and Natural Heritage?'

The Convention on Biological Diversity, signed in Rio in June 1992, has been

ratified by 169 countries. In general. each country has the obligation to conserve and

sustainably use its own biological diversity. However mechanisms to promote this goal

have only been developed to a limited extent. For the Convention to come into force,

30 countries need to ratify it. The dzveloped countries are looking for a sustainable

supply of biological resources from the developing countries and easy access to them

as welLY2 The developing countries lacking the technology to exploit their resources

are inviting the developed countries to do so. This has resulted in the developed nations

channeling out the benefits of these natural resources. The developing countries are

now demanding a higher share of the .xcrued economic benefits. The developed nations

are also concerned about the unsustainable exploitation of natural wealth, particularly

rainforests. The Convention also reaff~rms the sovereign rights of the States over their

biological resources. India is also a party to the Convention. In order to provide

conservation, sustainable utilizatio~~ and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of

utilizations of genetic resources and also to give effect to the Convention on Biological

Diversity, India sought to enact a aw on this point and formulated the Biological

Diversity Bill, 2000.93

Educating for Biodiversity in India

Realizing that there is no comprehensive legislation dealing with biodiversity

in India and following up on its obligations under UN Convention on Biological

Diversity, Government of India has introduced the Biological Diversity Bill into

Parliament and which became an Act in 2002?4 The Biodiversity Act (BDA) promises

to help arrest the destruction and pirscy of India's Biological Resources and Traditional

Knowledge. BDA is supposed to achieve conservation and sustainable use of the

countries biological resources. However critics argue that the Biodiversity Rules

recently introduced to the act in 2004 ,s disappointing as the new rules hardly empower

the local communities in the manageraent of bio diversity.95 The rules are also silent to

how PBRS (Peoples Biodiversity Registers) would be protected against thefi and misuse.

However the bill provides ample scc~pe for biodiversity education in school children

and youth mobilization against hunting and over exploitation by creating public

awareness. It provides protection of local communities for their immense traditional

wisdom and check on the local out flow on genetic materials fiom India and the unbridled

exploitation of resources by industrit:~ and urban consumers.

Earth Summit Plus 5: 1997

In 1997, five years after the Kio Earth summit, the United Nations convened a

special session of its General Assen~bly from 23-27 June in New York namely The

UNGASS (United Nations General Summit Assembly Special Session), otherwise

called 'Earth Summit Plus 5' by the organizers to review the implementation of

Agenda 2 1 .% The session was called to assess progress in the five years since the 1992

Earth Summit - the UN Conference on Environment and Development - and chart the

course for future work based on Agenda 2 1, the blueprint for sustainable development

adopted at the Rio Summit.* The participants were struck with the bad reality, that the

global environment has gone further downhill, deteriorated since 1992, with rising

levels of greenhouse gas emissions, toxic pollution and solid waste and that the rich

would not care about the poor world; development. Contrary to the Rio pledge the aid

and technology transfer to the south never materialized. Renewable resources, notably

fresh water, forests, topsoil and marine fish stocks continue to be used at rates that are

clearly unsustainable. On the positive: side, growth in world population is slowing, food

production is rising, local air and water quality is improving in many developed countries,

and the majority of people are living, longer and healthier lives. At the same time, the

number ofpeople living in poverty h3s increased, and gaps between rich and poor have

grown, both within and between countries.

* Fifty-three heads of State or Government anc 65 environment and other ministers attended the session to lend nolitical imoetus and visibilitv to the talks. I n the soirit of Rio. some 1.000 reoresentatives of non-eovemmental brgaoizatioAs (NGOs) attendeb the special ses:;ion, in addition to the over 2,560 government delegGes and 1.000 iour~~alisls. For the first time, statements were beard in the plenary by representatives of the "maior groups" of civil \.xiely a> dcfincd in Agenda 21 uolnen. ;l~~ldr,,n and yoolh, ~ n d i ~ e n o u s ~ e o ~ l c . NGOs working on ei~v~runmcn~ and dcteI~p1nen1, local yovernnici!! offirisl,. trudr ~nions. h~slness and industry, rcicnllsls and farmers

Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21

At the close of "Earth Summit +5" delegates from over 165 countries adopted

the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21.97 To address these

concerns, Governments took action on several fronts at the special session, as reflected

in the final document. Among other decisions, they agreed to reconfirm the political

commitment to sustainable development from all members of the international

community, as well as from all major groups of civil society; to reconfirm the financial

commitments and targets for official development assistance (ODA) made by

industrialized countries at the Earth Summit and call for intensified efforts to reverse

the downward trend in ODA; to establish an Intergovernmental Forum on Forests to

continue policy dialogue on this issue; to open high-level intergovernmental dialogues

on fresh water and on energy and trarlsport, which will be taken up by the Commission

on Sustainable Development at upcoming sessions; and to set a more focussed work

programme for the commission on Sustainable Development through the year 2002,

when the next General Assembly review will he held.

Earth Summit+5 was significant in that it conducted an in-depth, honest and

participatory political assessment of progress achieved since Rio, and laid the ground

for continuing work. In striving to build consensus, the session highlighted the political

importance of the issues at the heart of sustainable development, and again placed the

future of the planet at the forefront of world awareness. Unfortunately Earth Summit+St

failed to agree on a common 'Politic:al Statement' when it ended in New York on 27

June 1 997.98 This LEarth Surnmit+S' only managed to adopt a simple anduncontroversial

'Statement of Commitment'. This f.2ilure is a reflection of the fact that the political

gap between North and South has gl.own wider since the Rio Earth Summit in 1992.

Earth Summit +5, in fact was a betrayal of Rio. As the meeting ended the NGOs were

calling it "Earth Summit Minus 5' R ~ O " . ~ ~ But the positive aspect was that the special

session brought together the global cornmunity and environment and development group.

There was also great vitality in workshops, discussions, networking and planning for

future works and campaigns on all kinds of issues. What is needed is to translate this

renewed vitality into a new wave of grassroots activism and campaigning in the years

ahead - for this is the only hope for any improvement in the world environment.

Concern about the global risks posed by hazardous substances like Persistent

Organic Pollutants (POPs)

An important development in the course of environmental communication is

the call made by international comrnunity in the beginning of this century for global

action to reduce and eliminate releases of hazardous substances like Persistent Organic

Pollutants (POPs). These are human made compounds such as dioxins, DDT, PCB's,

texaphene, dieldrin, and hexachlorobenezene. They are used as pesticides and in industrial

processes or are generated as by-prc~ducts of combustion.1oo They can be carried long

distances by winds and water currents and in migrating animals and can build up in the

tissues of living organisms to harmful levels. Some of these compounds have been

shown to cause cancers and birth defects, increase infertility, and interfere with

endocrine, hormonal, and immune system functioning. Most of the twelve POPs

currently addressed in international negotiations have been banned by many countries

because of their toxicity and environmental persistence. The United Nations

Environment Programme (UNEP) has been leading the development of a global legally

binding agreement to minimize releases of twelve POPs in a conference held in

Stockholm in May 2001 hoping to be in force on obtaining the signatures of fifty

nations.lO' The Government of India singed the POPs agreement in May 2002.

World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)

The latest in the series of international conferences was World Summit on

Sustainable Development held at Johannesburg, South Africa from 26 August to 41h

Sept 2002. The challenge of raising living standards while protecting the environment

has been one of the biggest challenges ever since the environmental problems came to

the surface.lo2 TO resolve this was undoubtedly a complex and politically sensitive

issue facing the WSSD.* The Summit did produce a plan of action on sustainable

development, but it was a plan that either watered down existing national and global

commitments or passed off old agrzements as new ones. It did produce a political

declaration, but the rambling docunient will not serve as a charter for Governments

* "Progress since the (1997) Earth Summit has bee1 slower than expected. More important slower than what is needed. A setback would now be a tragic niissed opponu~~ity " the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said prior to the World Summit before it started on 26'h August.

55

and societies. Billed by the United Nations bureaucracy as the "last chance to save

the planet", the only meaningful message from the Johannesburg jamboreeis that the

expensive talk shops that the U.N. znvironment and development summits have

become no longer serve any useful purpose. The biggest problem of the WSSD was

that the U.N. process attempted to make the meeting much larger than a review of the

landmark 1992 Earth Summit at Rio tie Janeiro. As a result, a disorderly agenda that

covered every imaginable economic and environment issue was foisted on the

WSSD.'03 The result was only to be expected - a rambling agreement with nonbinding,

weak and regurgitated promises to pi:omote sustainable development. However, an

accord in the Johannesburg plan of action to halve by 2015 the two billion people

without access to sanitation and drinking water has been touted as one of the biggest

achievements of the WSSD. This was achieved after much hairsplitting between the

U.S. and the rest of the world over the language in the agreement. But this very

commitment is already one of the U.N. goals. Another achievement that has been

touted is the commitment at the WSSD to "significantly cut" the rate of species

extinction by 2010.*

Post-Rio Environmentalism

Since Rio, we have seen the dzvelopment of new patterns of environmentalism

throughout the world. One of these is the emergence of protest, as part of peoples

green movement, particularly appealing to young people to become directly engaged

and personally responsible for a better future. These include critique of post war

modernization, science -based critique of unlimited growth, the counter-culture

movement, the mediatisation of social life, the development of social critiques and

social movements, especially feminism and urban movement and opposition to the

dangers of cold war and search for certain global ~ommonalties. '~ Although such

protests have a complex pre-history, contemporary direct action has formed partly in

reaction to the professionalism and growing criticism of the more established

* The Earth summit was slammed by environmentalists and development campaigners as lacking much in the way of new action to tackle pveriy and environmental degradation, the 10-day conference and its hefty action plan, if followed may produce some winners and losers.

environtnental groups. Such protests especially emphasize inventiveness in method,

including the surprising use of new t~:chnologies and a heightened cynicism with official

organization and processes. There is thus a newer generation of environmentalists

who are bypassing conventional environmental groups. Such newer environmentalists

employ various kinds of non-violerit direct action groups.

Radical Environmental Groups .- Green Radicalism

Often associated with the deep Ecology philosophy and working in contrast to

the main line conservation organization, there are a few radical environmental groups

in some parts of the world. They gelieve in direct action to prevent environmental

degradation. Earth First, a direct action group in America and Poland and Sea Shepherd,

a radical off shoot from 'Green Peace', are two such famous groups.los The main

tactics of these groups are civil disobedience and attention grabbing action, such as

picketing, protest marches, road blocking etc. Many of these techniques are borrowed

from the civil rights movement and Mahatma Gandhi's non-violent civil disobedience.

Some of them even resort to more problematic tactics known as 'Environmental

Sabotage'.'06 They resort to amilitar). style of operations. For example, the Sea Shepherds

determined to stop the killing of marble animals by sinking whaling vessels and destroying

their machinery. Members of the Earth First have chained themselves to giant tree

smashing bull dozer to prevent falling trees. Among the actions advocated by some Earth

Firster's are drilling steel spikes in trees to protect them from loggers, destroying their

construction equipment, pulling up survey stakes for unwanted developments, destroying

bill boards, putting sugar in the fuel tank of bull dozers and sitting in a tree for prolonged

periods. Not every one may be comfortable with the tactics of these radicals. Their

intentions may be honest, but their actions have raised some difficult ethical questions.

Strengthening of the concept of l~olism

Another Post-Rio Environtnental Scenario is the strengthening of the concept

of holism against the modem approztch to development as mechanistic and reductionist

(Compartmentalized). Although the concept of holism was used long ago by Smuts

(1926),'07 modem holism implies ac:ceptance that "the whole is greater than the sum of

the parts" and that modem science unwisely tends towards excessive reductionism,

en~piricism and compartmentalizatic~n (isolation of fields of study from each other).

Post modem explanations reject the rnodem approach to development and argue for a

paradigm shift towards the holistic less reductionist, problem-solving, with little

distinction made between humans and Nature and a multidisciplinary approach to try

and understand the complex whole.lo8 In short, postmodem researches seek to understand

the totality of the problem, rather than components. Not every one is, however happy

wlth these trends; Atkinson (1 991), fix example, warns ofrisks involved in adopting a

holistic approach.lW

Culture of Consumerism and Sustainable Development Ethics.

Another development that rnay spell problems for those seeking to manage

the environment is the culture of consumerism, which has taken hold in developed

countries and is spreading almost globally and particularly in Kerala. It may therefore

prove difficult to control irrational and wasteful consumption patterns. To counteract

this, post modem environmentalists cling to the idea of sustainable development ethics,

admitting that resources are limited and therefore we have to change attitudes and life

styles to use them judiciously and ~arefully."~ Hopefully, this awareness is spreading

throughout the world, with the result that communities whose survival base is threatened

by the modem developmental patterns adopted by the consumer west and local elites

are forcefully demanding a paradigm shift towards the sustainable. This movement will

prompt the developing countries to pursue a path towards development that are very

different from those taken by the developed countries. The encouraging fact is that

people's green movements and NGOs are clearly gaining strength to pressure politicians

for such a change.

Environmental Education for Sustainable Development

Another major feature of post- Rio environmentalism is the emergence of

contemporary international discussion for reorienting environmental education for

sustainability. A detailed vision of what is education for sustainability is likely to be

the subject for continued discussion According to Brundtland Report 'Sustainable

development is that which meets the needs of the present without compromising the

ability of future generations to meet their own needs1.'(' It cannot depend on just the

technology available to us, the nature of our environment or the policy we make. A

public, which is educated about the need for sustainable development is essential for

achieving this. It is with this vision th.it Agenda 2 1 document of the 1992 Earth Summit

focussed on public education, awareness and training and confirms the importance of

positioning environmental educatioil in the perspective of sustainable development.

The UNESCO Thessalonica Declaraiion (1977) followed by the Earth Summit Plus 5 -

1997 reviews the implementation of tnis concept of- 'Education for a Viable Future"j2.

This is a multidisciplinary vision for concerted action in order to further clarify the

concept of education for sustainabli: development. It presented sustainability as an

ethical and moral imperative and the objective to which education should devote itself

as an instrument of choice.

Environmental Justice

The role of NGOs in the complex evolution of contemporary environmentalism

for sustainable development deserves special mention here. Instead of struggling to

prove the existence of environmental issues, they now seek to find solutions. Such a

shift reflected most explicitly by 'Green Peace' has led to an increased focus on industry

where NGOs are often trusted more than the government and industries hardly trusted

at all.'" They affirm the concepts of environmental justice as the most important

ingredient in any recipe of measures aimed at environmental sustainability.

Environmental justice mandates thf: right to ethical, balanced and responsible use of

land and renewable resources in the interests of a sustainable planet for human and

other living things, thus affirming the Brundtland report that 'inequality is the planet's

main environmental problem' (WCED 1987)li4 Environmental justice also affirms

the sacredness of Mother Earth, ecological unity and interdependence of all species

and the right to be free from ecological destruction by the consumerist West and

local elites.

New Consciousness: Green Romanticism.

Historically, the tern1 'romanticism' was attached to an intellectual movement

in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that opposed the rise of modern science and

liberal political doctrines, favouring instead an artistic and aesthetic orientation to life

and politics. To romantic thinkers anc poets, nature and humanity belonged to an organic

relationship best understood and developed through feeling and insight. They rejected

the idea that Nature could be best un~lerstood through scientific knowledge and can be

manipulated on the basis of that lu~owledge. The rejection of science, embrace of

empathy and insight and cultivation of radically different ways of experiencing one's

self and Nature is shared by contemporary green romantics. Perhaps the best-known

variety of green romanticism is deep ecology. Another one, Ecofeminism is a deep

philosophy in the sense that it seeks mdical changes in ecological consciousness, though

it is generally hostile to deep ecology. The root of all environmental problems, according

to ecofeminists, is not anthropocentrism (human dominion of nature), but rather

androcentrism (male dominion of everything).' Is According to economists, things begin

to go drastically wrong in the way humans treat each other and the natural world with

the rise of patriarchy, which dominates over women and nature alike. Thus the liberation

of women is tied up with libertarian ofnature; both depend on the abolition of patriarchy.

Ecofeminism differs from deep ecology in its sympathy with the animal liberation

movement. Deep ecologists, in contrast, show no concern for animals once they are

out of Nature- for example in facto~y ,farms or laboratories. But both camps believe in

the cultivation of radically different human sensibilities, involving a non instrumental

and non-dominating, more empathe1.i~ and intuitive relationship with Nature.

Eco-theology

Both deep ecologists and et ofeminists also advocate Nature-based spirituality

with divinity located in this world, rather than in figures located off the planet. However

these two movements do not exhaust the range of ecotheology. Ecotheologians diagnose

the root of environmental problems in spiritual terms, and if the root of the problem is

spiritual, then so must be the cure. 'The classic argument here is that of the historian,

Lynn White (1967) who argues that environmental crisis is the product of Judeo-

Christian religious tradition, which places God outside or above nature and then

proclaims that man is made in God':. image.'16 This placement provides justification

for unlimited human exploitation and abuse of Nature for purely human ends. Other

ecotheologians are more inclined to giie up Judaism and Christianity in favour ofEastem

religions such as Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, all of which casts humanity in far

more humble terms, adopting a contemplative and reverential attitude toward Nature.

Critics, however point out that the societies, which follow these religious faiths, are

no less prone to ecological destruction than Western societies.

New Politics: Green Rationalism

Rationality is a matter of open-ended and critical questioning of values,

principles and ways of life, which opens the door to critical ecological questioning.

Thus 'green rationalism' is defined by its selective embrace of enlightenment values,

which it then tries to push in an envirlsnmentally defensible direction.] l 7 They are led to

contemplate the social dimensions. of ecological issues, which green romantics

normally ignore. Green rations.lists are necessarily humanists as well as

environmentalists. Green rationalism is perhaps best classified as an emergent discourse,

in that it is still under construction as a comprehensive view of postmodern

environmentalism. It would probably benefit from the linking of several strands from

different parts of the world, some of which are at present only dimly aware of one

another. The component strands include the European Greens (eg. the German Green

party), Social ecology (which is deep ecology's main ecophilosophical rival in United

States green circles), the environmental justice movement in the United States (dated

precisely to 1978 when the Love Canal homeowners association was organized to

protest dumping of toxic wastes), social ecofeminism, bioregionalism (concerned with

the re-inhabitation of existing places of settlement by human societies) and animal

liberation movement.'18 The ideologies propagated by the green rationalism may in the

end have little more success than green romanticism in confronting entrenched political

-economic system.

Political and Ecological Communication

It is seminal to explore the prospects of an effective green democracy by

working with a political model whose essence is authentic communication rather than,

say preference aggregation, representation, or partisan competition thus being better

able to enter into a fruitful engagement with natural systems than others and so more

effectively cope up with the ecological challenge. Here we need green structures, not

just green values. In this context, according to Dryzek, among the political mechanisms

that have been tried by nations from time to time, liberal democracy is the most

ecologically rational system"9.* But even here, the fact remains that the way political

systems are structured can make an enormous difference when it comes to the likelihood

of releasing green values. And if this is true, then we should be able to derive a model

politics from the green theory of value. In such a mode, (anthropocentric or biocentric

/ ecocentric), there should be some kind of polity that could embed something more

than short-term human material interests, and achieve more sustainable equilibrium

encompassing natural and human syslems. In this spirit, the search for green democracy

can indeed involve looking for progr~:ssively less anthropocentric political forms. For

democracy can exist not only among humans, but also in human dealings with the natural

world. So the key here is seeking more egalitarian interchange at the human /natural

boundary, an interchange that involvesprogressively less in the way ofhuman autism.'20

In short, ecological democratization here is a matter of more effective integration of

political and ecological communication.

The Communicative Rationality of Ecological Democracy

Communicative rationality involves understanding cross subjects, the

coordination of their action througn discussion and socialization. Communicative

rationality is the degree to which these processes are uncorked, undistorted and engaged

by competent individuals. Thus some degree of communicative rationality is crucial to

* Liberal democracy also guarantees anthropocen.rism. As Freya Mathews notes, 'liberalism as it stands is of course anthropocentric: it takes human interests as the measure of all values'. Liberalism does so because only reasoning entities are accorded political standing .The men~bersof a liberal democracy might, ofcourse choose to enact positive measures for environmental protection, for exa:nple, by granting legal rights 6 natural objects. Guardians bf those objects might then make claims on political and legal systems. But any such representation might simply downgrade nature to another set of interests, thus ignoring tlieir intrinsically ecological (interconnected) character.

any democracy. But such a democracy need not be green because the only fruitful

human attitude toward Nature is one clf instrumental manipulation and control. Indeed,

the whole point of comniunicative rationalization is to prevent human interactions with

one another becoming like human interactions with the natural world. 1 2 ' We should treat

signals emanating from the natural world with the same respect we accord to signals

emanating from human subjects and as requiring equally careful interpretation. In other

words, our relation to the natural world should not be one of instrumental intervention

and observation of results oriented to control. Thus communication interaction with the

natural world can and should be an eminently rational affair.I2' Of course human verbal

communication cannot extend to the natural world. But greater continuity is evident in

non verbal comn~unication - body language, facial displays, pheromones and so forth.

There are senses in which Nature can communicate. So the question is what kind of

politics or democracy can be at issuc here. For the ecological democrat, the relative

ideal is effectiveness in cornrnunicaticln that transcends the boundary of human w0r1d.I~~

As it enters human systems, then ol~viously ecological communication needs to be

interpreted. However, unlike the situation in liberal democracy, this communication does

not have to be mediated by the material interests ofparticular actors.

Green Democracy: Political Alternative

To conclude, in contemplat~ng the kind of communication that might ensure

more harmonious coordination across political and ecological systems of the

postmodern scenario, green democracy can constitute a process as well as a g0a1.I~~ AS

a goal, any such green democracy might appear very distant, given the seeming global

hegemony of profoundly anti-environmental liberal democratic and capitalist ideas,

celebrated by Francis Fukyarna (1 992) as the 'end of history'.125 But if the 'grow or die'

system of capitalist democracy is uitimately unsustainable in the light of ecological

limits, green democrats are well placed to both hasten its demise and initiate political

alternatives. This might not be a bhd way to see history moving again. Ecological

con~munication demands a truly deniocratic international community that understands

the meaning of living in an inter-connected world, committed to building a socially

just and environmentally sustainable society.'26

63

References:

UNESCO - UNEP - International Environmental Education Programme, Environmental Education Series 17, UNESCO Division of science, Technical and Vocational Education, 1986, p.8.

C.J. Barrow, Developing th,? Environment: Problems and Management; Harlow, Longman Group Ltd., 1995, pp. 10-17.

Chris Park, The Environment - Principles and applications, London, Routledge, 1997, p.26.

Zbid. p. 26, para V

K.E. Boulding, The economics of the coming spaceship earth, Development Digest IX(l), 1971 p.12-15. (First published 1966 In H. Garrett (ed.) Environmental quality in a grgwing economy, Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins University Press).

Ward B. and Dubos R, Only One Earth: the care and maintenance of a small planet, New York, Penguin Books, W.W. Norton and &Company, 1972.

Jonathan Silvertown and Philip Sarre, Environment And Sociery, London, Hodden & Stoughtonin Association with the open University. 1990, p. 238.

Chris Park, The Environment - Principles and applications, London, Routledge, 1997, p.103.

The Hindu, 21 April, 2001

Stephen R. Kellert, Simon, t:ds. Mac Million Encyclopedia on Environment: Vol 2, New York, Schuster and Prentice Hall International, 1997, p.40.

Anil Aganval, Danyl D Monte, Ujwala Samarth, eds. Thefight for Survival - People s action for Envinjnment, New Delhi, Centre for Science and Environment, 1987, p. 346.

Mahabharata Moksa-Parva 182(14-24) quoted by O.P. Dwivedi, Environmental Ethics, New Delhi, Sanchar Publishing House, 1994, p. 84.

Padmapurana, Bhoomikhanda 96: 7-8.

Green Brigade, India Green File - A Selection of Clippings on the Environment September 1 to 30, 1995, No.93 p. vi.

Lynton Keith Cladwell, International Environmental Policy Emergence and Dimensions. New Delhi, Affiliated East-West Press Pvt. Ltd., 1990, p.26.

J.E. Lovelock, Gaia - A New Lookat Life on Earth, New York; Oxford University Press, 1979, pp.vii-x.

J.E. Lovelock, The Ages of Gaia - A Biography ofour Living Earth, New York, W.W. Norton and Company, 1988, pp. 87-90.

K. P. Joy, Greening ofMinds, Thiruvalla, Christava Sahitya Samithi, 2001, p.70.

C.C. Park, Ecology and Env;ronmental Management, London, Butter Worth, 1980, p. 42.

Stephen R. Kellert, Simon, This is what ..., Op.cit ..., pp 2-3.

A. Naess, The shallow and the deep, long range ecology movement, A summary, Inquiry, 16, 1973, pp 95- 100

Jonathan Silvertown, Naess c:alls ..., Op. cit.. p. 259.

Susan D. Lanier - Graham, l'he Nature Dictionary : A guide to Environmental Organization, New York, Walker and Company, 1991, pp.147-185.

Bruce Wyman & L. Harol Stevenson, Dictionary of Environmental Science, New Edition, Mumbai, Jaico Publishing house, 2003, p. 171.

Ibid. p. 158.

John E. Carroll, International Environmental Diplomacy, New York, Cambridge University Press, 1990, p.23.

Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad, The Silent Valley Hydro-electric Project and Ecological Aspects of Silent Valley, Report of the Joint Committee set up by the Government.

Meadows, D.H., Meadows. D.L., Randers .J.and Behrens.W.W. 1 1 1, The Limits to Growth- a report for the Club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind, New York, Univer:;al, 1972, pp. 3-6.

Chris Park, Malthus was ..., t3p.cit., p. 12.

E.F. Schurnacher, Small isBeautlfit1, Bombay, Harper & Row, 1973, published in India by VSSU Graphics, pp 5 - 99.

G.H. Brundtland, Global Change and Our Common Future, Environment, 1989, 31(5) p. 23.

A. Hodges, Mineral Resources, Environmental Issues and Land Use, 1995, Science, 268. p. 1305.

Ibid. p. 13 12

Chris Park, But whilst ..., Op cit., p. 13.

Ibid p. 13-14.

Mac Million Encyclopedia, +Op.cit., p. 27.

Science and Public Affairs: Bulletin ofthe Atomic Scientists 28 (September 1972) What happened at Stockholm - A special Report, 49. p. 36.

Lynton Keith Cladwell, Third -qorld..., Op.cit., p.30.

Michael E. Colby, Environmental Management in Development: The Evolution oflaradigms, No.80, World Ejank , 1990.

Ibid.

R.E. Dunlap and A.G.Mertig, The evolution of the US environmental movement from 1970 to 1990: an overview, Society & Natural Resources 4 (30); 199 1, pp. 209-218.

Social learning is basic to the emergence of international environmental concern as discussed by Edgar S. Dunn in Economic and Social Development; A Process of Social Learning, Baltimort:, Md ; John Hopkins University Press, 1971; and Donald N. Michael, On Learning to Plan and Planning to Learn: The Social Psychology of Changing Toward Future Responsive Societal Learning, Jossey-Boss, San Francisco, 1!)73.

UNEP, Our Planet, Magazine for Environmentally Sustainable Development. Vol. 7 No 3, p. 2.

UNEP News Letter, publishetl by Division of Communication and Public Information, UNEP, Nairobi Kenya, 2003, p. 3-4.

Stephen R. Kellert, Simon,Aj'ter the 1972 ..., Op.cit., p.28,

Ibid. p.29.

Notes for speakers, Environment and Development, Published by the United Nations Dept. of Public Inforn~ation, July 1991, p.9.

UNEP, Global Environment C1utlook-3, Nairobi, Earthscan Publications Ltd, 2002, p.5.

G.V.T.Mathews, The Ramsal Convention of Wetlands; Its History and Development, Ramsar Convention Bureau, Gland, Switzerland, 1973, pp. 1-5.

Ramswar Convention Bureau (2001), The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. http://www.ramsar.org (Geo-1- 133).

Annie Mathew (Ed), Select Bibliography on Ramsar Sites ofKerala, CWRDM, Kozhikode, Kerala, 2003, p. 3.

UNESCO, The World Herilage List, Paris, UNESCO, 2001, http:/l www.unesco.org/whc/heritage.lltmi (Geo- 1-029).

CITES Secretariat (200 11, The ClTESSpecies, CITES http://www.cites.ors/eng/ disc/species.shtml(Geo- 1-005).

U N E P , Global Environment t3utllook-3, The Cocoyoc ..., 0p.cit.. P.6.

Ibid. p. 7 .

Ibid. p. 8.

Notes for speakers.., Faced with ..., Op.cit., p.22.

New and renewable sources of Energy and the Environment: Note by the Secretary - General. UN document AJAC. 2 18/1990/3.1990.

Willard J. Jacobson, The main aims ..., Op.cit., p. 8.

Ibid. p. 9.

The International Clinic on Environmental Education (Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 13-22) Oct. 1975. Final Report (Doc. Unesco/ED/MD/49.

Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education (Tbilisi, USSR, 14-26 Oct. 1977 ). Final Report, p. 25 (Doc.Unesco/ED/MD/49).

World Conservation Strateat: Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development (Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, UNEP, WWF, 1980). Preceding publication of the World Conservation Strategy was the prospectus of A Conservation Programme for Sustainable Development 1980- 1982: prepared by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources as a framework for the activities of IUCN, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and their associates (Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, 1 December, 1979).

Erik p. Eckholm, Down to Eizrth :Environment and Human Needs Foreword By Barbara Ward, New Delhr, Affiliated East-West Press Pvt. Ltd, 1991, p.9.

U N , United Nations General Assembly 37Ih Session, Resolution 37/7, New York, United Nations, 1982.

G.H. Brundtland, Afew years ..., Op.cit., pp. 1-5.

Diamond ,S. The Bhopal Disaster: How it Happened. The New York Times, 28 January 1985.

UNEP, Global Environment Outlook-3, In 1986 ..., Op.cit., 9.

United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs: Internationally agreed glossary of basic terms related to Disaster management. http://www.unis&. orgl unisdr/glossaire.htm(Geo-2? 35).

The Hindu. Dec 27,2004.

UNCED, The Rio Declaration on Environmental Development, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janiero, 3-14 June 1992.

Grubb, M.M.Koch, K.Thomson, A.Munon and F.Sullivan, The Earth Summit agreement : a guide and assessment, London, Earth Scan, 1993, pp. 1-20.

UNCED, The Rio Declaratiotz.. . ., Op.cit., p. 50-60.

United Nations Division for Sustainable Development, Strengthening the Role of workers and their Trade Unions http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/aagenda 2 1 chapter 29.

Roddick. J., The results of t/'e Rio Earth Summit, Science, Technology and Development 10 (3), 1992, p. 348.

Five years after the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the state of the global environment hat continued to deteriorate, as noted in the Global Enw'ronment Outlook (Oxford, United Kingdom, Oxford University Press, 199 7 of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and significant environmental problems remain deeply embedded in the socio-economic fabric of countries in all region as given in Earth Summit + 5, UNEP, United Nations Department of Public Information, New York, 1997, p. 5.

Shears J., Remote sensing and image processing may he(p protect our fragile Earth. GIs World 5 (7), 1992, p. 54-56.

John Vogler and Mark F. Imber (Edts), The Environment and International Relations, Global Environmental Change Programmes: Rooutledge, London andNew York. 1997, p. 159.

United Nations Environment Programme, The Ozone Layer (UNEPIGEMS Environment Library No. 7, Nairobi, UNEP, 1987. p. 4.

Ibid. p. 289.

M.I.Andrews & K.P. Joy, Environmental Biology, Evolution, Ethology and Zoogeography, Changanacheny, St. Mary s Publications, 2003, p.165.

UNEP Ozone Secretariat, Action on Ozone, Nairobi, Kenya ,2000, p. 12.

UNEP, The Impact of Ozone Layer Depletion, Nairobi, UNEP 1992, Chapter 5: Future policy options p. 32.

Ibid. p. 35.

John Vogler, Described by the ..., 0p.cit.. , p 16.

Our Planet, UNEP Publication, Vo1.9, No.5, 1980, p.35.

UNEP, Nairobi, publication on Fifty Key Facts about Seas and Oceans dt.5th June, 2004.

Robert Watson and Others, .Protecting Our Planet and Securing Our Future Nairobi, Kenya, United Nations Environment Programme , U.S.National Aeronoautics and Space Administration; and World Bank 1998, p. 91.

United Nations Environment Programme, Global Biodiversity, Nairobi, UNEP, 1993, p. 37.

Ibid. p. 5 .

C.P.K., Biodiversity, Chennai, C.P.R. Environmental Education Centre, 1998, p. 74.

Global Biodiversity, The developed ..., Op.cit., p. 34.

C. P.R.E. E.C., Biodiversity, In order to ..., Op.cit., p. 64.

Biodiversity Bill, 2000, Indian Parliament, New Delhi.

Down to Earth, July 15,2004, p.54.

United Nations, Earth Swnmjt +5 Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21, Published l ~ y the United Nations Department of Public Informationp. v.

Ibid. p. vi.

S.M. Mohammed Idris, Third World Resurgence, Malaysia Issue No. 83 KDN PP6738/1/97, Third World Network, p. 5.

Ibid. p.8,9.

Robert Watson, They are used ..., Op.cit., p. 22.

Down to Earth, June 15,2002, pp. 16-17.

UN Weekly News letter, 3 1 August - 6 September 2002 Vol. 57.

The Hindu, 91h September, 2002.

Phil Macnaghter & John Urly, Contested Nature, London, Sage publications, 1998, p. 73.

Ibid. p. 63.

Zbid. p. 65

Smuts, J.C., Holism and Evoiution (3rd edn, 1936), London, Macmillion, 1926.

Thomas Y. Canby, Our Changing Earth, Washington D.C, National Geographic Society, 1994, p. 12.

Atkinson. A., Principles ofl'olitical Ecology, Belhaven, London, 199 1.

Thomas Y. Canby, To counteract ..., Op.cit., p. 13.

The World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future, Geneva, Switzerland, Oxford University Press, 1987, pp. 43-46.

Dept. of Environment & heritage 'Today Shape tomorrow: Environmental Education for a sustainablej%lture ' a discussion paper released by Environment Australia, January, 1999, p.26.

Andrew Dobson, Justice and the Environment: Concepts of Environmental Sustainability and Dimensions ofSocial Justice, New York, Oxford University Press, 1998, pp.23-24.

The World Commission, Envi.~onmentaljustice ..., Op.cit., p. 6.

John S. Dryzek, The Politics of the Earth: ~nvironmental discourses, New York, Oxford University Pres:;, 1997, p. 161.

Lynn White, TheHistorical Roots of our Ecologic Crisis in 1.G.Barbour (ed) Western Men and Environmental Ethics, Attitudes toward Nature and Theology, London, 1973, pp. 18-30.

John S, Dryzek, Thus green ..., Op.cit., p. 172.

Ibid. p. 173

John S Dryzek, Rational Ecology: Environment and Political Economy, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1987. Ch.9.

Freya Mathews, Democracy and the Ecological Crisis, Legal service Bulletin, 16(4), 1991, p.158.

Alfred C. Fred, Gainswville, FL, Science and the Revenge ofNature, Florida, University Press, 1985, p.77.

John S. Dryzek and David Schlosberg, Debating the Earth : The Environmental Politics Reader, New York, Oxford University Press, 1998, p. 598.

Ibid. p.592.

Ibid. p.596.

Francis Fukuyama, The End ofHistoiy and the LastMan, New York, Free Press, 1992.

Lead India, Rio, Johannesburgand Beyond : India's Progress in Sustainable Development, New Delhi, Orient Longman, 2002, p.xvii.