samwad prof.madhav gadgil lecture

IIT Mumbai Samwad Friday, April 5, 2013

Page1

Science, Democracy and Ecology in India

Madhav Gadgil, [email protected]

Background note for interactive session with Samwad, IIT Mumbai,

Friday, April 5, 2013

Contents

Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2

Democratic culture of science ......................................................................................... 5

Ecology as a holistic science .......................................................................................... 7

Dharma and abhaya ....................................................................................................... 7

Dismal science ............................................................................................................... 9

Myth and reality .............................................................................................................10

Rent seeking .................................................................................................................11

Rule of point one per cent ..............................................................................................11

Development as freedom...............................................................................................12

Natural capital ...............................................................................................................12

Non-renewable resources ..........................................................................................13

Plachimada experience ..............................................................................................14

Polluters pay? No way! ..............................................................................................16

Human capital ...............................................................................................................19

Health and nutrition ....................................................................................................19


Page2

Employment ...............................................................................................................21

Abuse of scientific information....................................................................................21

Social capital .................................................................................................................25

Sacred hills of Niyamgiri .............................................................................................25

Ecological Costs of Mining......................................................................................27

Human Costs of Mining ..........................................................................................28

Enforcement of the Forest Rights Act .....................................................................29

A dire warning ........................................................................................................34

A heartening experience .........................................................................................34

Science for social revolution ..........................................................................................35

River Research Centre...............................................................................................36

Impact on the availability of water in the downstream Panchayaths ........................38

Availability of water and power generation ..............................................................39

Precision agriculture-animal husbandry- forestry systems ..........................................41

Tracking the sun ........................................................................................................47

In conclusion .................................................................................................................47

Summary Summary Summary Summary

It is being said that 21st century will belong to India and China. We live in a world

shaped by science and products of science-based technologies. The latter are now moving from

a focus on machines to one on information, and the current century promises to be an age of

knowledge. It will also be a century of worldwide awareness of ecological concerns. Knowledge

prospers in the free atmosphere of the democracies; democracies also take far better care of


Page3

their environment. It is therefore our fond hope that given our democratic strengths India will

eventually take a leading position in the community of nations despite the current higher rate of

economic growth in China.

But are we doing justice to our democracy, to our scientific and technological

capabilities, to our heritage of environmental prudence? We currently seem to be launched on a

path of development that is based on the premises that free markets ensure economic efficiency

and lead to economic growth with wealth flowing down to all segments of the society, and

therefore all interference with markets, including regulations towards protection of environment

and sensitivities towards what the people at the grass-roots want should be set aside. But these

propositions are neither grounded in good empirical evidence, nor in sound logic. Free markets

ensure economic efficiency only if there is completely free and fair competition without any

monopolies, and if the consumer has full information relating to the possible choices; this is

simply not so. Furthermore, markets, even if entirely free, do not take account of externalities

such as depletion of natural resources, and therefore do not guarantee genuine economic

efficiency. Indeed, world over this flawed philosophy has fostered rent seeking, such that

economic gains of the beneficiaries of this philosophy are often excessive and in no way

proportional to their social contributions. Consequently a small proportion of the population has

cornered the bulk of the wealth and political power, and democracy has been perverted from a

one person-one vote to a one rupee-one vote system in which the powerful are continually

engaged in distorting the economy and polity to enhance their own, often unjustifiable, gains.

The resultant undesirable consequences include [a] exhaustive use of natural resources, [b]

unacceptable pollution loads, [c] failure to build human capital because of misuse and abuse of


Page4

science and technology, persistent malnutrition, poor health care, and high levels of

unemployment and under-employment, and [d] an erosion of social capital with increasing levels

of social disaffection and strife.

This is why Justice Shah Commission’s (2012) Report on Illegal Mining in Goa

states that “Part IV. Section 24 of the Mines and Minerals (DR) Act, 1957 was not observed at

all and that no inspection was carried out of iron ore mines, resulting into fear-free environment

which has caused loss to the ecology, environment, agriculture, ground water, natural streams,

ponds, rivers, biodiversity, etc.” It is also why Saxena committee on VEDANTA mining lease on

the Niyamgiri hills in Orissa concludes with the following warning: “This Committee is of the firm

view that allowing mining in the proposed mining lease area by depriving two Primitive Tribal

Groups of their rights over the proposed mining site in order to benefit a private company would

shake the faith of tribal people in the laws of the land which may have serious consequences for

the security and well-being of the entire country.”

Regrettably, throughout the country democratic processes and constitutional rights of the

people are being brazenly violated, and scientific information is being suppressed or distorted,

hand in hand with destruction of the environment. This is being done in furtherance of an

extremely reductionist approach of pursuing economic growth at all costs. Such an approach

militates against the wisdom of adopting a holistic, systems perspective in addressing the

complex problem of charting the course of development of one of the world’s most multifaceted

societies.

Citizens of India, including, of course the scientists and technologists, must face

up to this challenge, and there are many examples of positive initiatives. These include River


Page5

Research Centre’s independent, voluntary assessment of the proposed Athirappilly Hydro

Electric project on the Chalakudy River, bringing out that the project is clearly undesirable, not

just on environmental, but on technical and economic grounds, as [1] there is not enough water

to generate power as claimed, [2] it will adversely impact currently available irrigation resources,

[3] it will destroy tourism by drying up a scenic waterfall. Furthermore, the project will destroy the

last low elevation riverine forest of this region, and is being pushed through in violation of the

Forest Rights Act. Another type of positive intervention comes from devising more information-

intensive systems that reduce demands on the material and energy resources. An excellent

example is Seshagiri Rao’s development of an Indian style precision agriculture-animal

husbandry- forestry system that in the process of promoting economic efficiency ends up

dispensing with all use of chemical inputs and utilizing a wide diversity of herb, shrub and tree

species.

It is vital that in this age of knowledge, the Indian community of scientists and

technologists must strive all the more vigorously to play a positive role in addressing the

challenges of protecting our environment, safe-guarding our democracy, and nurturing the spirit

of science.

Democratic culture of scieDemocratic culture of scieDemocratic culture of scieDemocratic culture of sciencencencence

We live in an age shaped by science and products of science-based technologies. Ours

is also an age in which democracy has become the most accepted, most respected form of

governance. This is not a coincidence; science and democracy share a common set of values.

At the same time, there is a worldwide awareness of ecological concerns; concerns that have

their roots in the impacts of products of science-based technologies, and that find their most


Page6

effective expression in democratic societies. India is the world’s largest democracy, we claim to

have imbibed the spirit of science, our ancient culture has rich traditions of ecological

awareness and over the last forty years we have instituted many measures for protection of the

environment. How has all this worked out? And where do we go from here? This is what I hope

to explore in this talk.

Science, like all generation of knowledge is a collaborative enterprise. Our current

understanding of human evolution suggests that we owe our preeminence in the living world to

our occupation of the “cognitive niche” – to our ability to generate knowledge thanks to our

symbolic language and to our sociality facilitating extensive sharing of information. Science is a

particular form of knowledge characterized by sharing amongst people who are in principle

equals. J. D. Bernal, one of the founders of modern biology and of the study of sociology of

science defines science as an organized, systematic enterprise of skepticism. A. N. Whitehead,

an eminent mathematician-philosopher characterizes science as knowledge that is firmly

anchored on the bedrock of empirical facts, however unpalatable they may be. Science

recognizes no authority other than that of empirical facts and of logical deductions grounded in

empirically validated observations. Democracy too recognizes no authority except that freely

chosen by people who are in principle equals. It values skepticism guaranteeing freedom of

thought, expression and belief as fundamental rights. Paralleling science’s embrace of logical

deductions democracy embraces the rule of law.

If, as scientists, we are to propound ethical values based on our understanding of forces

of nature that have conferred an elevated position on humans, these would not be values of

Social Darwinism, of struggle for existence, for such struggle is common across the entire living


Page7

world. Rather, humanity has been shaped through mutual aid amongst equals and therefore the

ethical value flowing from our understanding of the natural world would be that of fostering

cooperative behavior in the society, very much in tune with values of science and of democracy.

Ecology as a holistic scienceEcology as a holistic scienceEcology as a holistic scienceEcology as a holistic science

Just as science is a particular way of growing and organizing knowledge, ecology is

particular form of scientific inquiry. Many other forms of scientific inquiry focus on a narrow

range of specific conditions. Thus the study of motion of a projectile such as a shot fired from a

canon may proceed by ignoring friction and influence of gravitational attraction of all bodies

other than the earth. Such investigations of simple systems have yielded rich dividends,

permitting us to fly airplanes or land a man on the moon. But ecology must necessarily take a

holistic, systems view. In its absence, follow serious blunders. For instance, at one time,

managers of pollution in New York decided that the answer to air pollution caused by the

burning of kitchen refuse was to install grinders in sinks and send the liquefied waste into

sewerage, only to discover that this led to a worse problem of water pollution. So ecology tells

us that we must carefully assess the influences of any human interventions throughout the

system. This systems perspective is essential to proper understanding in all sciences of

complex systems, including economic, political, social and behavioural sciences. Holism is also

an important principle that must guide governance of all, including that of democratic societies.

Dharma and abhaya Dharma and abhaya Dharma and abhaya Dharma and abhaya

It is evident that the values enshrined in the Indian constitution: Sovereignty, Socialism,

Secularism, Democracy, Justice, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, and Human Dignity and the


Page8

Fundamental Rights: freedom of thought, expression, belief, and faith and the right to livelihood

are very much in tune with the evolutionary ethic, the spirit of science and the spirit of ecology.

Rajatarangini, the thousand-year-old Kashmiri historic epic of the poet Kalhana states that the

duty of the ruler and of the State is to preserve dharma and abhaya – righteousness and

absence of fear. In the twenty-first century, the Dharma of the Indian state should be to do its

utmost to promote the fundamental values and guard the fundamental rights guaranteed by our

Constitution. This would automatically ensure abhaya, fearlessness for the people. One may

then ask: Is the single-minded pursuit of economic growth, at the cost of all else, that is being so

forcefully promoted today, justified in this framework? This pursuit of economic growth flows

from an extremely reductionist approach that militates against the wisdom of adopting a holistic,

systems perspective in case of such a complex problem as charting the course of development

of one of the world’s most multifaceted societies. Of course, the pursuit of economic growth, and

the values of the Indian Constitution and the fundamental rights of the citizens could, in

principle, be mutually supportive. However, as scientists, we must squarely face the unpalatable

fact that there is extensive empirical evidence that this is not at all so.

This contradiction is strikingly brought out by Justice Shah Commission’s (2012) Report

on Illegal Mining in Goa. The Report states that “Part IV. Section 24 of the Mines and Minerals

(DR) Act, 1957 was not observed at all and that no inspection was carried out of iron ore

mines.” It goes on to remark that “But no inspection has been carried out resulting into fear-free

environment which has caused loss to the ecology, environment, agriculture, ground water,

natural streams, ponds, rivers, biodiversity, etc.” The fear-free environment that the Report is

talking about is that enjoyed by the mining industry supported by all arms of the state in its


Page9

lawless behavior. In consequence, the populace lives in a state of suppression of many of their

democratic freedoms and rights. The Report also documents large scale violations of the spirit

of science with suppression, distortion or deliberate neglect of generation of pertinent empirical

data.

Dismal scienceDismal scienceDismal scienceDismal science

Economics claims to be a science, albeit a “dismal” one in contradistinction to “gay or

life-enhancing sciences”. So propositions of economics too must be firmly grounded in

empirical facts and sound logical deductions. Hence, it is pertinent to enquire if this is indeed so.

Joseph Stiglitz, an eminent economist, winner of 2001 Nobel Prize and a former Chairman of

Economic Advisory Council of Bill Clinton has recently written a well-researched book titled the

“Price of Inequality” that documents in great detail that many, supposedly scientific propositions

that have been guiding American economic policy are grounded neither in reliable empirical

observations, nor in sound logical deductions. He subjects to very skeptical scrutiny the core

propositions of the advocates of free market economy. These contend that free markets ensure

economic efficiency and lead to economic growth with wealth flowing down to all segments of

the society. This leads to the prescription that state interventions in the free play of markets

should be minimized, that governmental expenditure should be pruned to the maximum extent

possible and that the benefits of such reductions should be passed on to the wealthy by

reducing their tax burden, because it is the wealthy who will invest their savings most efficiently

in fostering further economic growth.


Page1

0

Myth Myth Myth Myth and realiand realiand realiand realitytytyty

Stiglitz argues that the proposition that free markets ensure economic efficiency follows

only if there is completely free and fair competition without any monopolies, and if the consumer

has full information relating to the possible choices. He shows that these conditions are

extensively violated in many contexts in the American economy. He further notes that markets,

even if entirely free, do not take account of externalities such as depletion of natural resources,

and therefore would not guarantee genuine economic efficiency. He also shows that the

postulate that wealthy classes invest their enhanced savings efficiently, thereby promoting

economic growth is not supported by empirical evidence. Indeed, he brings out that what drives

the American economy today is rent seekingrent seekingrent seekingrent seeking, such that economic gains of many agents are

often excessive and in no way proportional to their social contribution. Because of these

disproportionately large economic gains a small proportion of the American society has

cornered the bulk of the wealth and political power. As a result American democracy has been

perverted from a one person-one vote to a one dollar-one vote system in which the powerful are

continually engaged in distorting the economy to enhance their own unjustifiable gains. The

resultant undesirable consequences include [a] exhaustive use of natural resources, [b]

unacceptable pollution loads, [c] failure to build human capital because of declining investments

in education, science and technology, poor health care, and high levels of unemployment, and

[d] an erosion of social capital with increasing levels of social disaffection and strife.


Page1

1

Rent seekingRent seekingRent seekingRent seeking

Stiglitz provides a large number of striking examples of rent seeking from US

experience. These include [1] Successful resistance by coal industry to incorporating depletion

of non-renewable resources into economic accounting and consequent reduction in high levels

of subsidized rates enjoyed by the industry, [2] Successful resistance by British Petroleum of

liability to pay full damages caused by oil leakages due to their own negligence, [3] Successful

attempt by drug industry to ensure that Government does not purchase drugs at rates arrived at

through proper open market competition, [4] Successful attempts by military contractors that

Government unquestioningly accepts the exorbitant rates quoted by them, [5] Iniquitous

management of student loans programmes that ensures large profits to private educational

institutions benefitting from Government investment in educational infrastructure but providing

poor quality education leading to youth becoming indebted for life because of unfair terms of

loan repayment, [6] Illegal foreclosures on house mortgages that cannot be resisted by victims

because of the high cost of legal action, [7] Unfair sanction of large bonuses by Bank

Executives to themselves mischievously taking advantage of Government bail-out payments

when, in fact, the irresponsible banks should have been allowed to go bankrupt according to all

tenets of free-market economy.

Rule of Rule of Rule of Rule of point point point point one per centone per centone per centone per cent

There are obvious parallels with the Indian scene. The functioning of Indian democracy

is very much an example of what Stiglitz has termed Government of one per cent, by one per

cent, for one per cent, possibly of point-one per cent, by point-one per cent, for point-one per


Page1

2

cent, with (a) extensive depletion of natural resource capital through [1] overuse or [2] unlawful

pollution, because of a lack of holistic planning, of (b) degradation of human capital exemplified

by [3] distortion and abuse of scientific information, [4] high levels of malnutrition, [5] high levels

of underemployment and unemployment, and (c) erosion of social capital as witness [6] brazen

corruption and [7] escalating social violence.

DDDDevelevelevelevelopmentopmentopmentopment as freedomas freedomas freedomas freedom

Equating development with rate of growth of Gross Domestic Product constitutes an

instance of adopting an extreme, completely inappropriate reductionist point of view when the

imperative is that of adopting a broad holistic, systems perspective. Amartya Sen, the

distinguished Indian economist presents such a perspective, asserting that development must

be viewed as a process of expanding real freedoms that people enjoy, freedoms such as of

access to adequate food, clean water, unpolluted air, shelter, education, health care, and gainful

employment. Sen also insists that above all development should lead to an enhanced capacity

to engage in social, political, and economic decision making. From this perspective

development is not to be equated solely to the growth of a narrowly defined and measured

economic product, but is a more inclusive concept that must also embrace changes in natural

capital, human capital and social capital.

Natural capitalNatural capitalNatural capitalNatural capital

The course of India’s economic development is today distorted by entrepreneurs not

having to pay the real social cost of depletion of natural resources through excessive rates of

use of non-renewable resources or exhaustive use of renewable resources and through, often


Page1

3

totally unregulated polluting activities. The situation is further complicated by the State investing

in wasteful use of natural resources, apparently in order to profit contractors, who in turn, share

their misbegotten gains through kickbacks to netas and baboos. The currently raging

controversy over management of Maharashtra’s water resources appears to be a case in point,

whereby an excessive number of dams have been constructed in Godavari basin although there

is not enough of water to justify these. As a result the dams merely end up creating shallow

water-bodies that increase evaporative losses resulting in overall lower levels of water supply

for human use. This is a glaring example of counter-productive economic activity in aid of rent-

seeking.

The proposed Athirappilly Hydroelectric project on Chalkudy river in Kerala appears to

be another such wasteful, inappropriate enterprise being pushed by vested interests. A careful

technical assessment of the project by River Research Centre with help of data accessed

through RTI shows that this project is clearly undesirable, not just on environmental, but on

technical and economic grounds, as [1] there is not enough water to generate power as

claimed, [2] it will adversely impact currently available irrigation resources, [3] it will destroy

tourism by drying up a scenic waterfall. Furthermore, the project will destroy last low elevation

riverine forest of this region. In addition, the project is being pushed through in violation of the

Forest Rights Act.

NonNonNonNon----renewable resourcesrenewable resourcesrenewable resourcesrenewable resources

Economists like Stiglitz have worked out ways of deciding on appropriate levels of costs

that should be borne by users of non-renewable resources such as coal, petroleum of iron ore,

although the American coal industry is not permitting them to be put in operation. These should


Page1

4

constitute the floor price below which state should not allow extraction of any non-renewable

resources. Above this floor, the state should decide on the costs through transparent, open

bidding that excludes any possibilities of collusion. This is far from happening in India where

manufactures of underwear are being allotted coal blocks at very low prices and then allowed to

sell them to a higher bidder, making completely unjustified profits. This, apart from the

environmental and social consequences, causes huge losses to the national exchequer.

In stark contrast are the arrangements worked out by Norway, which not only enjoys

amongst the highest per capita GDP of any country, but very low levels of economic disparity

coupled to a very effective system of taking care of the environment. Norway has constituted a

Petroleum Fund into which it is depositing revenues generated by exploitation of its North Sea

oil stocks, charging proper costs, carefully regulating the rate at which the stocks are being used

up and investing the proceeds in a national fund, so that this fund will generate financial yields

at a level comparable to the profits from the exploitation of the oil stocks. In effet, they have

converted a non-renewable into a renewable resource. This is an example that India should

emulate, instead of the current mayhem in the mining sector as brought out by the remarks of

Shah Commission quoted above, and the example of Niyamgiri hills in Orissa discussed below.

Plachimada experiencePlachimada experiencePlachimada experiencePlachimada experience

Our information base on agricultural, horticultural, livestock and fishery production is

weak, that on employment in unorganized sector even weaker. For instance, fishing and shell-

fishing in the river Ganga is a major economic activity. Yet no proper information at all is

available on the fish and shell-fish yields, on the number of people employed, on the income

generated, or on the protein resources thus made available. In recent years sand mining has


Page1

5

become a major activity over large tracts of Ganga. Yet there is absolutely no information being

collected on the extent of sand being mined, on the number of people employed in mining and

as a result going out of fishing, on the income generated in mining and as a result being

reduced in fishing, or on the protein resources being decimated through the impact of sand

mining. So all of this figures in no way in the GDP figures or the poverty statistics being touted

around.

A rare instance of a case where impacts of industrial activity on the capital of natural

resources and on the livelihoods of people has been looked at comes from Plachimada, a

Panchayat in Palakkad district of Kerala where a Coca Cola plant is located. The Coca Cola

plant has severely depleted ground water in the area, leading to drying up of wells, loss of

agricultural productivity and consequent negative impacts on livelihoods. Going against the spirit

of democracy and of science, the state level Governmental authorities are in favour of totally

ignoring all these issues, not collecting the relevant information and let the privileged economic

enterprises make unjustified profits – a classic example of rent-seeking. But Kerala has made

substantial advances in decentralized governance and the Plachimada Panchayat has stood its

ground, forced a proper scientific inquiry into the losses suffered by the Plachimada residents

and gone ahead and rescinded the license of this global soft drink major. While cancelling the

license, the panchayat evoked its constitutional rights (further empowered by state legislation).

As local elected government, it has argued, it has the duty to protect the well-being of its

subjects. So it has the right to cancel -- or refuse permission -- to anything that affects its

subjects adversely. The panchayat holds the soft drink plant responsible for depleting

groundwater in the area under its jurisdiction; this has affected local agriculture. The


Page1

6

panchayat's reasoning is important: it establishes the crucial link between governance and

managing local natural resources. After all panchayats have been constituted precisely for this

reason. The company, on its side, contends that the panchayat is a subordinate of the state

government and thus cannot operate out of its domain. The state high court rejected this

argument and dismissed the company's writ petition. In the meantime, a state government

constituted Technical Expert Panel has estimated the economic loss suffered by the residents of

Plachimada at Rs. 2 billion and the state legislature has gone on to unanimously pass a bill

named “Plachimada Coca Cola Victims Relief and Compensation Claims Special Tribunal Bill

2011”. Kerala Governor forwarded the bill for Presidential assent on March 30, 2011. The

Ministry had, in turn, referred it to the Ministries of Law, Agriculture, Environment and Forests

and Water for comments on April 18, 2011 and that is the last that has been heard about it from

Delhi.

Polluters pay? No way!Polluters pay? No way!Polluters pay? No way!Polluters pay? No way!

Stiglitz and many other economists insist that polluters must pay for cleaning up pollution

and other related social costs fully to ensure healthy economic growth. In India today not only is

this principle being ignored, but the democracy too is being subverted in the process. A case in

point is that of Lote MIDC chemical industry hub in Chiplun taluka of Ratnagiri district in

Maharashtra. I had an opportunity to understand the situation in some detail in conjunction with

the work of the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel. During the WGEEP meeting with

Government of Maharashtra officials in Mumbai on 30th September, 2010, I enquired if there

were any on-going programmes of involving the people in environmental monitoring in

Ratnagiri-Sindhudurg districts. I was informed that this function was being performed by a


Page1

7

Ratnagiri District Environment Committee chaired by the Ratnagiri District Collector, and

additionally there was a very active ‘Lote Abhyas Gat’ attached to Lote MIDC.

I immediately contacted Ratnagiri District Collector, as well as the Lote Abhyas Gat with

the help of Maharashtra State Pollution Control Board. On 5th October 2011 I had a meeting

with the Lote Abhyas Gat. During the meeting, it was reported that although the Abhyas Gat

was constituted in 2006, only two meetings had been held till that date, the last being in 2008.

Representatives from Kotavale, the worst hit village were not included in the Lote Abhyas Gat

despite their request. Shri Sachin Ambre, Upsabhapati, Khed Panchayat Samiti, and a

member of Lote Abhyas Gat insisted that the functioning of the Lote Abhyas Gat was

thoroughly unsatisfactory. The Abhyas Gat had prepared some norms on effluent discharge, but

these were not being followed. It is understood that many industries at Lote are pumping toxic

waste into ground water through bore wells. Apparently, three such cases were brought to light,

but there has been no action.

This Abhyas Gat meeting was followed by a field visit to Common Effluent Treatment

Plant and some surrounding areas, as well as visits to Dabhol creek and discussions with many

community members. It was revealed that the CETP cannot handle the quantity of effluent it is

receiving, and its functioning is highly defective. We saw large overflows of untreated effluent

from the plant going into streams serving Kotavale village. Since the situation was not being

brought under control, the Sarpanch of Kotavale attempted to commit suicide by drinking the

polluted stream water. He was rushed to Mumbai and saved, but there had been no abatement

of pollution affecting Kotavale. Also, in 2000 around 30 School children near Lote MIDC became

unconscious due to inhalation of poisonous gases. The company involved took no notice, and


Page1

8

did not come forward to take children to the hospital. People also reported that solid toxic

sludge from industries was mixed with soil and dumped in the ghat area. Around August 2011,

some party dumped toxic wastes via a tanker in the Boraj Dam which is the water supply of

Khed town. The town water supply had to be stopped for several weeks, but nobody had been

brought to book. There has been significant decline in fish landings from Dabhol creek due to

Lote chemical pollution, and severe loss of employment opportunities for members of fishing

communities.

With all these problems persisting all that the Pollution Control Board has done seems to

be to transfer the Lote office to Chiplun, rendering any chances of effective action even more

remote than before. At the same time, the district administration has been actively suppressing

completely lawful and peaceful protests against pollution exceeding all legal limits by local

citizens on grounds of law and order by invoking Bombay Police Act 1951 Sec, 37(1)(3)

prohibiting gathering of people. Such prohibitory orders had been promulgated on as many as

191 out of 600 days previous to my visit.

This field work around Lote was followed by a meeting at the office of the Ratnagiri

District Collector on 7th October, 2010. Contrary to what I was informed by State level officials in

Mumbai on 30th September, 2010, I was told that while there was a proposal to constitute a

Ratnagiri District Environment Committee, no such committee was in existence. It was further

learnt that there have been a large number of public hearings about various projects, and the

overwhelmingly unanimous sentiments of people have been completely ignored. In public

hearing of Finolex (1000 MW) coal TPP at Ranpar Ratnagiri Taluka and nuclear power Station

(1600 MW X 6) at Jaitapur of Rajapur Taluka public opinion was unanimously against these


Page1

9

projects. In Kalane village, the first Public hearing regarding a mine project was held on 20-9-

2008. At this time, Marathi EIA was not available and therefore the hearing was postponed. The

public hearing was held once again held on 11-10-2008, after Marathi EIA was made available.

At this hearing, the unanimous resolution of Gram Panchayat dated 6-8-2008 opposing mining

was submitted and several objections were raised: 1. Pollution of Kalane river and adverse

impact on water supply scheme on this river at Chandel in Goa. 2. Adverse impact on

horticulture dependent on natural water sources in Kalane. The villagers were not provided

summary minutes during the public hearing. These summary minutes were made available only

after 57 days. Despite the unanimous rejection of mining proposal, Government of Maharashtra

went ahead and gave Environmental Clearance to the mine on 17th march 2009. Furthermore,

several Gram Panchayats, and Panchayat Samitis, including Ratnagiri Taluka Panchayat Samiti

have specifically passed resolutions relating to environmental issues that are also being

completely ignored by state government. Clearly, people are in no way involved in protecting,

managing, monitoring the environment of Ratnagiri-Sindhudurg districts, or, for that matter,

anywhere else in India.

Human capitalHuman capitalHuman capitalHuman capital

Health and nutritionHealth and nutritionHealth and nutritionHealth and nutrition

A well-nourished, healthy, well-educated and well-informed people are an important

asset of any state. Indeed, Mahabharata insists that a mal-nourished people are a major

blemish on the ruler. What then is the status of our people’s health and nutrition? What stands

out is that we are exceedingly poorly informed of the situation despite the network of Primary


Page2

0

Health Centers throughout the country. A case in point is the experience of the Loss of Ecology

Authority set up to award compensation to people affected by serious pollution of Noyyal river of

Tamilnadu by tanneries. Some, though allegedly inadequate, compensation has been awarded

for loss of agricultural production. However, no compensation has been awarded for adverse

impacts on health, although it is admitted that there have been such impacts, because the

Authority is forced to rule out any such compensation in the absence of any documentary

evidence to ascertain the extent of these impacts, evidence that ought to have been available in

the PHC records.

Many records that do exist are extensively doctored to suit the requirements of the

authorities. For instance, the programme of providing mid-day meals in schools is an important

component of the national effort to ensure that the children do not suffer from malnourishment.

Regular records are therefore maintained of indicators of levels of malnourishment by the

authorities. Regrettably, the Mid-day-meals programme suffers badly from corrupt practices and

the desired results are not being obtained. This is being concealed by providing fake statistics.

Thus, the statistics compiled from state level educational institutions shows that at the all India

level the proportion of malnourished school children declined from 28% in 1993 to 17% in 1999

and further to 8% in 2006. This dubious statistics may be compared with the results of the much

more careful National Family Health Survey (NFHS), a large-scale, multi-round survey

conducted in a representative sample of households throughout India. The NFHS results

indicate that proportion of malnourished school children declined from 53% in 1993 to 47% in

1999 and had remained pretty much static at 46% in 2006. A recent study by International


Page2

1

Food Policy Research Institute suggests that fully 50% of world’s malnourished people are

citizens of India.

Employment Employment Employment Employment

An important benefit of new economic activity is of course employment generation. Very

strikingly, the national level empirical data suggests that the current pursuit of economic growth

is not accompanied by higher levels of employment generation. The most reliable information

on this count comes out of National Sample Survey. According to this statistics 63 million new

jobs were created during the period 1999-2004. It was expected that at least 50 million new jobs

would be created 2002002002004-09. However the number of new jobs created was a meager 1 million.

Notably no account is being taken in all this statistics of old jobs destroyed by environmental

degradation. For instance, the Chemical Industry hub at Lote employs around 11-12 thousand

people, while the loss of employment amongst fishing community due to water pollution has

been estimated at a similar level, that of around 10-20 thousand.

Abuse of scientific informationAbuse of scientific informationAbuse of scientific informationAbuse of scientific information

An important facet of building the nation’s human capital is creating a well-informed and

well-educated populace. Nurturing of a scientific temper, including encouraging objective

scientific record-keeping and studies has to be a vital component of this endeavour. Going

completely against this spirit is much deliberate non-recording or falsification of information, as

noted above in the case of levels of malnourishment amongst school-children.

Nevertheless, some good environment-development related data sets have been

created in the country over the years. One such set is the Zonal Atlas for Siting of Industries

(ZASI), prepared for most of the districts throughout the country as a co-ordinated effort of


Page2

2

Central and State Pollution Control Boards. The exercise was justified by the GoI agencies

themselves on grounds that this information would facilitate proper siting of new industrial units

which would benefit industrial development by ensuring that industries do not propose new units

in unsuitable locations, thereby avoiding undue delays and obviating protests. ZASI adopts a

systems perspective, and attempts to evaluate potential cumulative impacts that may cross

some unacceptable thresholds. With this in view the reports consider the pollution load-bearing

capacity of various parts of any given district, prevalent levels of pollution and levels of

permissible additional pollution generating activity. As an example, the table below reports the

air quality in Ratnagiri district, which shows critical air pollution levels in the Lote MIDC area.

The conclusion is that no more polluting industries should be located in the Lote MIDC

area. Despite this there are plans to setup new Petro Chemical MIDC area nearby on 550Ha, a

completely inappropriate decision. Regrettably, such short-sighted and scientifically

unjustifiable pursuit of industrial growth, has led to the Ministry of Environment and Forests, GoI

itself suppressing this vital data set, a data set that was generated at large public expense and

much investment of human resources. So even its own Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel

(WGEEP) was not informed of this data set by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, despite

specific inquiries for all available data sets, till the Panel learnt of its existence through some

local concerned citizens of Ratnagiri district. As a result of requests, the Panel was then


Page2

3

provided a copy of the Ratnagiri Zonal Atlas for Siting of Industries, although it failed to access

any others, except that of Goa, made public due to citizen pressure.

WGEEP report suffered a similar fate of suppression of good scientific information

compiled at public expense and with serious investment of human resources. This Panel was

constituted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, GoI, with a mandate to:

(i) To assess the current status of ecology of the Western Ghats region.

(ii) To demarcate areas within the Western Ghats Region which need to be notified as

ecologically sensitive and to recommend for notification of such areas as ecologically sensitive

zones under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

(iii) To make recommendations for the conservation, protection and rejuvenation of the

Western Ghats Region following a comprehensive consultation process involving people and

Governments of all the concerned States.

Basically this entailed a scientific task of deciding on a set of criteria for declaration of

Ecologically Sensitive Zones on the Western Ghats, putting together a spatial database on

ecological parameters for the region, delineating potential ecologically sensitive zones, and

suggesting a strategy for conservation, protection and rejuvenation of the Western Ghats tract,

taking into account our assignment of ecological sensitivity levels.

In order to properly appreciate the issues, WGEEP conducted field visits and wide

ranging consultations with civil society, experts, concerned state governments, MoEF officials,

elected representatives ranging from Gram Panchayat members to MPs and Ministers and

CMs. WGEEP also published a scientific paper based on the initial formulation of our criteria for

ecological sensitivity for public discussion in India's premier scientific fortnightly, Current


Page2

4

Science in January 2011. WGEEP submitted its report as required on August 30, 2011. It was

informed that the report will be released at a public function on 21 September 2011. On 19

September 2011 it was informed that the report is not going to be made public.

Beyond that, the report set in motion a series of developments that culminated in Central

Information Commissioner passing a significant order on April 9, 2012. This order, passed by a

Commissioner who is a graduate of IIT, Mumbai and had himself been a private industrial

entrepreneur includes the following remarks:

“Disclosing a report or information does not mean that the government has to follow it. It

may perhaps have to explain the reasons to public for disagreeing with a report based on logic

and coherent reasons. This cannot be considered as prejudicially affecting the scientific and

economic interests of the State.

If such reports are put in public domain, citizens’ views and concerns can be articulated

in a scientific and reasonable manner. If the Government has reasons to ignore the reports,

these should logically be put before people. Otherwise, citizens would believe that the

Government’s decisions are arbitrary or corrupt. Such a trust deficit would never be in the

interest of the Nation.

The disclosure of the WGEEP report would enable citizens to voice their opinions with

the information made available in the said report. Such opinions will be based on the credible

information provided by an expert panel constituted by the government. This would facilitate an

informed discussion between citizens based on a report prepared with their/public money.

MOEF’s unwillingness to be transparent is likely to give citizens an impression that most

decisions are taken in furtherance of corruption resulting in a serious trust deficit. This hampers


Page2

5

the health of our democracy and the correct method to alter this perception is to become

transparent. Such a move would only bring greater trust in the government and its functionaries,

and hurt only the corrupt”.

Social capitalSocial capitalSocial capitalSocial capital

Social capital, reflected in prevalence of a sense of fairness/ unfairness in the society

and the resulting social harmony/ disharmony is another vital component of nation’s capital

stocks. One striking manifestation of our failure to build social capital is the violence afflicting

India’s tribal heartland. One instance of what has been gone on in this region is the

controversial VEDANTA mining lease on the upper reaches of the Niyamgiri hills in Orissa. This

issue was very critically examined in 2010 by an official committee headed by Dr N C Saxena,

and the following account draws on the Executive Summary of the report of this committee.

Sacred hills of Sacred hills of Sacred hills of Sacred hills of Niyamgiri Niyamgiri Niyamgiri Niyamgiri

The VEDANTA site is largely a grassland surrounded by sal forests. The forested slopes

of the Niyamgiri hills and the many streams that flow through them provide the means of living

for Dongaria Kondh and Kutia Kondh tribes. These are Scheduled Tribes, with the Schedule V

of the Indian Constitution which enjoins the government to respect and uphold the land rights of

Scheduled Tribes applying to the entire Niyamgiri hills region. These tribes are also notified by

the government as ‘Primitive Tribal Groups’ and eligible for special protection. While the

Dongaria Kondh live in the upper reaches of the Niyamgiri hills, the Kutia Kondh inhabit the

foothills. The Niyamgiri hills are the sole habitat of Dongaria Kondh group whose distinctive


Page2

6

identity is evident in their unique language, agro-forestry expertise, social structure, and

religious practices.

The Niyamgiri massif is important for its rich biodiversity. In addition, it also plays the

critical role of linking forests of Kandhamal district to forests of Rayagada, Kalahandi and

Koraput districts. These forests also join the Karlapat wildlife sanctuary in the north-west and

Kotagarh wildlife sanctuary in the north-east. They thus have high functional importance in

creating an uninterrupted forest tract which is part of a continuous long corridor extending

outside the protected area. The fact that this forest- grasslands ecosystem is mostly prevalent in

areas inhabited by the Dongaria Kondh suggests that, besides natural geological and climatic

factors, it has also been modified by human actions such as burning for grasses and collection

of Minor Forest Produce (MFP) practiced over a long period by the hill tribes. Kondh tribes use

many of these plants as medicines to treat different ailments.

The two Kondh communities regard the Niyamgiri hills as sacred and believe that their

survival is dependent on the integrity of its ecosystem. The VEDANTA site is amongst the

highest points in the hills and it is considered especially important as a sacred site. The

proposed mining lease (VEDANTA) area is used by both Dongaria and Kutia Kondh and is part

of their Community Reserved Forests as well as their habitat, since they depend on it for their

livelihoods as well as socio-cultural practices. Their reverence for the hills is rooted in their

strong dependence on the natural resources that the mountains provide. Their customary

practices in the area include agriculture, grazing and the collection of minor forest produce. The

age-old access of Kutia and Dongaria Kondh to the VEDANTA area and the surrounding forests

has been recognized in several forest settlement reports and Working Plans.


Page2

7

Dongaria Kondh cultivate patches of land cleared from the forest that are rotated to

maintain soil fertility. Since their population is very small, they regard land as plentiful and leave

most of it forested. They are renowned for their skill in horticulture. The fruit that they grow on

forest plots fetches them a handsome income throughout the year. In addition, they collect a

variety of forest produce and also rear chicken, pigs, goats and buffaloes.

Ecological Costs of Mining Ecological Costs of Mining Ecological Costs of Mining Ecological Costs of Mining

Mining operations of the intensity proposed in this project spread over more than 7

square km would severely disturb this important wildlife habitat. The entire Niyamgiri hills will

suffer major ecological damage if mining is allowed in the VEDANTA area. Several perennial

springs flow from below the top plateau, which is a part of the proposed mining lease site. It

appears likely that the VEDANTA area is one of the main sources of Vamsadhara river which

would make mining on this plateau a hydrological disaster.

As many as 1,21,337 trees will have to be cut in case the mining lease is granted. Of

these trees approximately 40 per cent would be in the mining lease area while the remaining 60

per cent would have to be removed to construct the access road and other mine related planned

activities. Given that more than 1.21 lakh trees have to be felled; and since the number of

shrubs and large herbs in a rich tropical forest are at least thrice the number of trees, it can be

reasonably concluded that more than 3.63 lakh shrubs and ground level flora would also be

cleared under the project.

The VEDANTA (and the Niyamgiri Hills habitat) is highly productive in terms of wildlife

since it provides the valuable ‘edge effect’ to wild animals, with open grasslands as feeding

space and neighbouring trees for shelter and escape. The grasses are breeding and fawning


Page2

8

ground for Four-Horned Antelope (Tetracerus quadricornis), Barking Deer (Muntiacus muntjac),

as well as Spotted Deer (Axis axis). A rare lizard, Golden Gecko (Callodactylodes aureus), is

found on the proposed lease area. The value of Niyamgiri hill forests as an important elephant

habitat is well recognized; therefore this habitat has been included within the South Orissa

Elephant Reserve. Mining on the scale proposed in this habitat would severely disturb elephant

habitats, and threaten the important task of elephant conservation in south Orissa. That mining

causes severe disturbance to elephant habitats has already been demonstrated in Keonjhar

district.

Human Costs of Mining Human Costs of Mining Human Costs of Mining Human Costs of Mining

The VEDANTA area falls under four different administrative categories of forests.

Though there are no villages inside the VEDANTA area itself, there are four villages inside the

boundaries of the four forest blocks, as per the topo sheet, and 12 villages inside these four

blocks as per government notification. In addition, there are 27 villages adjoining to the four

Forest Blocks as per the toposheet.

Mining, if permitted, will directly affect almost 20 per cent of the world population of the

Dongaria Kondh community. An impact on such a significant fraction of the population of the

community will have repercussions on the community’s very survival, the overall viability of this

group and its biological and social reproduction. All the 104 Dongaria Kondh villages are linked

by marriage, since the member of a clan must seek a spouse from another clan. The circulation

of women and bride-price between villages is essential for maintaining the social and economic

integrity of the community. The mining operations will also have significant adverse impact on

the livelihoods of these communities for three reasons.


Page2

9

The mining operations will destroy significant tracts of forest lands. Since the Dongaria

and Kutia Kondh are heavily dependent on forest produce for their livelihood, this forest cover

loss will cause a significant decline in their economic well-being. Their cultivation lands lie in

close proximity to the VEDANTA area. Mining-related activities such as tree-felling, blasting, the

removal of soil, road building, and the movement of heavy machinery will deny them access to

their lands that they have used for generations. These activities will also adversely affect the

surrounding slopes and streams that are crucial for their agriculture. If the economic and social

life of one-fifth of Dongaria Kondh population is directly affected by the mining, it will threaten

the survival of the entire community – mining would destroy their economic, social and cultural

life.

Enforcement of the Forest Rights Act Enforcement of the Forest Rights Act Enforcement of the Forest Rights Act Enforcement of the Forest Rights Act

The entire VEDANTA area falls in the category of Community Forest Resource (CFR) as

defined in section 2(a) of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) for the tribals living in the villages inside or

surrounding the four forest blocks. In addition to these villages, there are several villages within

one to five km aerial distance from the proposed mining lease (VEDANTA) area. The entire

VEDANTA area (including the area of all the four forest blocks) is clearly the habitat of the two

Primitive Tribal Groups and their villages, as defined in section 2(h) of the FR Act.

These villages have been vested with recognizable community and habitat rights by GoI

under section 4(1) of the FRA, and the procedure laid down in section 6 of the FRA must be

followed by the district authorities. These rights should have been formalized by now, as the Act

came into being more than two years ago on the 1January, 2008. As holders of these rights, the

entire Dongaria Kondh community and Kutia Kondh living close to the four forest blocks are


Page3

0

empowered under section 5(c) of the Act to ensure that their habitat is preserved from any form

of destructive practices that affects their cultural and ecological heritage. The state government

cannot take any action that appropriates a part of their habitat without following the due process

of law.

As per the Preamble of the FR Act, forest dwellers are ‘integral to the very survival and

sustainability of the forest ecosystem’. Therefore, in law, forests now include forest dwellers and

are not limited to trees and wildlife. Since the MoEF is charged with the responsibility of

implementing the Forest Conservation Act, it has to ensure that both forests and forest dwellers

are protected. As far as forest rights are concerned, the Forest Rights Act, is a special law and

therefore the authorities specified under it override those recognized by the Forest Conservation

Act, a more general law. Section 5(c) has authorized the Gram Sabhas to ensure that their

habitat is preserved from any form of destructive practices affecting their cultural and natural

heritage. MoEF, as the authority under the Forest Conservation Act, cannot override the

statutory authority under the Forest Rights Act, viz. the Gram Sabhas. MoEF would in fact be

guilty of violating the FR Act, if it ignores the wishes of the Gram Sabhas.

The FR Act does not provide for modification of rights for any purpose other than

conservation of critical wildlife habitats. The Section 5 of the Act vests the Gram Sabhas and the

forest dwellers with statutory rights to their habitats, where they have the authority to conserve,

protect and manage forests, biodiversity, wildlife, water catchment areas and their cultural and

natural heritage. The rights conferred under the Forest Rights Act automatically imply that free,

prior and informed consent of forest dwellers such as the Dongaria and Kutia Kondh is a

prerequisite for the diversion/destruction of the forest that they inhabit. The consent of these


Page3

1

communities is required before any damage or destruction of their habitat and community

forests is authorized. This is independent of the fact whether the Gram Sabhas submit their

claims for the VEDANTA area or not.

Appropriation of land over which tribal and other inhabitants of these habitats have well-

recognized ownership and access rights, without due process of law and without consulting the

villagers themselves, would not only violate the Forest Conservation Act, but would also

forcefully evict forest -dwelling Scheduled Castes and Tribes from their lands and prevent them

from exercising their rights under FRA over their habitats.

According to section 4(5) of FRA, there can be no removal or eviction of people from

forest land unless the tribal rights under FRA have been recognized and the verification

procedure is complete. In order to ensure the compliance of this section, MOEF, vide its circular

F.No.11-9/1998-FC (pt) dated 3 August, 2009, asked the state government to submit a number

of certificates to GoI, before its proposal for diversion under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

can be considered. These certificates included letters from each of the concerned Gram

Sabhas, indicating that all formalities/processes under the FRA have been carried out, and that

they have given their consent to the proposed diversion. The District Collectors did not attach

any of these letters from the Gram Sabhas in their certificates given in March 2010.

The Chief Secretary, Orissa in a general direction dated 24 October, 2009, to all District

Collectors, had instructed that proposals for diversion of forest land should be put before the

Gram Sabhas, and their consent or rejection should be attached. This directive was also

ignored by the district administration of Rayagada and Kalahandi; the letters from the Gram

Sabhas were not attached with the certificates given by the Collectors.


Page3

2

The district authorities have failed to provide maps and electoral rolls to the Gram

Sabhas as provided in rule 6(b) of the FR Rules. Hence they have violated these FR Rules. In

addition, they have also failed to act under rule 12(3) of FR Rules. This rule mandates that if a

forest area is used by more than one Gram Sabha, the Forest Rights Committees of the

respective Gram Sabhas shall meet jointly to consider the nature of enjoyment of such claims,

and submit the findings to the respective Gram Sabhas in writing. As the VEDANTA habitat may

be common to a large number of villages or an entire tribal group, it was incumbent upon the

district administration to call a meeting of multiple concerned villages. In fact, by failing to record

the community and habitat rights of the Kondh, these officers are guilty of violating the law. They

should not forget that they could be punished under section 7 of the FR Act for contravening the

provisions of the Act and the Rules.

From the meeting with the senior officers and the Chief Secretary, it was apparent that

the district administration has been reluctant to act fairly and firmly under section 6 of the Act to

formalize the rights of Kondh over the VEDANTA area, as the state government has already

decided to transfer the said land for mining. Hence, it was not keen to recognize community and

habitat rights of the Primitive Tribal Groups over the VEDANTA area. This is in spite of the

undisputed fact that, as dictated by the FR Act, government authorities have no discretionary

rights to ignore these rights. Not only is the transfer of community resources for mining without

seeking their informed consent unfair, it is also illegal after the enactment of the FR Act. The

administration has also failed to consult the PTGs and other forest dwellers about the impact of

mining on their lives after the passing of FR Act. Their consent for diversion of land has not

been taken.


Page3

3

Despite the reluctance of the district administration and state government, several Gram

Sabhas have already passed resolutions claiming community and habitat rights over the

VEDANTA area under various sub sections of section 3, such as (1)(b), (c) and (e), and

forwarded the same to the SDLC, as provided in section 6(1) of FRA. For instance, the

resolution of the Gram Sabha of village Kendubardi demanding rights over Aonlabhata (one of

the local name for the VEDANTA area) has been received in the SDLC in Aug 2009. Similarly,

the Palli Sabha resolution dated 8 January, 2010, from village Phuldumer, which was visited by

the chairperson, states, ‘We use Aonlabhata (Badabhatta) the area of Niyamgiri which is the

proposed mining lease area of VEDANTA’. Rather than process such applications as under law,

the district authorities chose to give a false certificate in March 2010 that there have been no

claims from the Gram Sabhas for the area covered under mining lease.

After the visit of the committee members to village Khambesi, their Palli Sabha too

passed a resolution on 30 July, 2010, stating, ‘It was unanimously decided that as the proposed

area is the primary source of our life and livelihood as well as the basis of our culture, the

mining would be protested. Through this Gram Sabha resolution this message would be

conveyed to the Committee constituted by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government

of India, not to allow the VEDANTA company for the extraction of bauxite from the Niyamagiri

reserve forest, Proposed Khambesi reserve forest , proposed Nimagiri reserve forest and other

adjacent forest areas’.

From the evidence collected by the Committee, we conclude that the Orissa government

is not likely to implement the FR Act in a fair and impartial manner as far as the VEDANTA area

is concerned. It has gone to the extent of forwarding false certificates and may do so again in


Page3

4

future. The VEDANTA Company has consistently violated the Forest Conservation Act, Forest

Rights Act , Environmental Protection Act and the Orrisa Forest Act in active collusion with the

state officials. Perhaps the most blatant example of it is their act of illegally enclosing and

occupying at least 26.123 ha of Village Forest Lands within its refinery depriving tribal, dalits

and other rural poor of their rights.

A dire warningA dire warningA dire warningA dire warning

In conclusion the Saxena Committee gives a dire warning: “In view of the above this

Committee is of the firm view that allowing mining in the proposed mining lease area by

depriving two Primitive Tribal Groups of their rights over the proposed mining site in order to

benefit a private company would shake the faith of tribal people in the laws of the land which

may have serious consequences for the security and well being of the entire country.”

Regrettably this is no isolated example. Throughout the country democratic processes

and constitutional rights of the people are being brazenly violated, hand in hand with destruction

of the environment. This is being done in furtherance of an extremely reductionist approach of

pursuing economic growth at all costs. Such an approach militates against the wisdom of

adopting a holistic, systems perspective in addressing the complex problem of charting the

course of development of one of the world’s most multifaceted societies.

A heartening experienceA heartening experienceA heartening experienceA heartening experience

Fortunately, there are rays of hope. The Government of Maharashtra is as hell-bent on

sabotaging rights of local communities to promote corporate interests that have regrettably

decided to take full advantage of the prevalent economic growth at all costs approach instead of

adopting a broader perspective in long term social interests. Yet, local struggles can yield


Page3

5

positive results as has happened with Gond and other local communities of Gadchiroli district of

Maharashtra that have won Community Forest Rights over extensive areas. This is promoting

prudent resource use in the long term interest of the resource base as well as far greater

economic returns to the local community. Notably enough, the communities have spontaneously

decided to set apart 10% of the Community Forest Rights areas as strict nature reserves. The

people, especially the youth are motivated to assess the resource base carefully, plan its

sustainable use and conservation, work out the potential of local level industrial processing and

appropriate marketing strategies. This provides a major scientific and technological challenge

and I am personally enthralled at this opportunity of working closely with highly motivated

people with a rich store of practical ecological knowledge in a scientific and technological

enterprise.

Science for social revolutionScience for social revolutionScience for social revolutionScience for social revolution

It is being said that 21st century will belong to India and China. The 21st century will be

an age of knowledge and it is hoped that given its democratic strengths India will eventually

prevail despite the current much higher rate of economic growth in China. But to do this we

must surely halt the on-going abuse of knowledge and of democratic values in India. This we

must do within the democratic framework and drawing on our scientific and technological

strengths.

Kerala, the God’s own country, has provided some notable examples of these

possibilities. These efforts were initiated by a fifty-year old popular science movement, Kerala

Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP), that has “Science for social revolution” as its motto. In the true

scientific spirit it has promoted a holistic vision of development, exemplified by its assessment of


Page3

6

the Silent Valley Hydroelectric project on the Kunthipuzha River in Palakkad district. This

interdisciplinary assessment was undertaken by a team of a physicist, an electrical engineer, an

economist and an ecologist. It brought out both the flaws in the arguments of the project

proponents as well as highlighted the conservation value of the region. The resultant process of

a very transparent and participatory debate finally led to the constitution of the Silent Valley

National Park. Although at that time the National Park proposal had many political opponents, at

its Silver Jubilee celebrations in 2011 all parties joined hand in declaring that wiser council had

prevailed in the constitution of the National Park.

River Research CentreRiver Research CentreRiver Research CentreRiver Research Centre

A worthy successor to Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad’s careful, interdisciplinary study of

the Silent Valley Project is the River Research Centre(RRC)’s assessment of the proposed

seventh large dam, the 163 MW Athirappilly Hydro Electric project on the 144 km small but

heavily dammed Chalakudy River, with her magnificent Waterfalls and rapids and her unique

biodiversity rich gallery forests and one of the highest levels of fish diversity among Western

Ghats rivers. The KSEB had engaged the WAPCOS (Water and Power Consultancy Services

(India Ltd) in January 2002 to conduct a Comprehensive Environment Impact Assessment

(CEIA) of the project. Their report was questioned by the Chalakudy Puzha Samrakhna Samithi

(CPSS) on various grounds; its period of study, consultations with the agencies (local bodies,

various departments of the government and the local communities) as suggested by the High

Court, methodology, and the scientific reliability. The Kerala State Biodiversity Board in an

affidavit filed in the High Court of Kerala categorically stated that the EIA report of the WAPCOS

was not comprehensive, and that the methods followed for the biodiversity studies were totally


Page3

7

wrong and unacceptable. There was no indication that the WAPCOS had any consultations with

the agencies suggested by the Public Hearing Panel. However, the KSEB went ahead and

obtained the clearance to the project from the MoEF on 10.2.2005. Another PIL was filed by the

Athirappilly Grama Panchayath and the tribals, the prime potential sufferers of the proposed

dam, challenging the sanction accorded by the MoEF, mainly on the ground that the report of

the second EIA was not circulated and kept away from the public and that there was no public

hearing on the second EIA. The High Court of Kerala by its order dated 23 March 2006 quashed

the Environmental Clearance given by the MoEF on 10.2.2005 and asked the Kerala State

Pollution Control Board to conduct a Public Hearing after “publishing the environmental

assessment report stated to have been prepared by the KSEB”.

This second Public Hearing on the proposed Athirapilly hydro-electric dam was

conducted on 15 June 2006 at Chalakudy, Trichur. According to CPSS’s written submission to

the WGEEP, more than 1200 people attended the Public Hearing where none spoke in favour

of the project and, in the 252 written representations submitted to the Public Hearing Panel, the

ratio for and against the project was 1:9 respectively. CPSS further stated that the minutes of

the Public Hearing Panel was not unanimous; of the five members, three were against the

project and among them two happened to be the Presidents of the Athirapilly Gram Panchayath

and the Chalakudy Block Panchayath; representatives of the people of the two Panchayaths

who would be affected directly by the construction of dam.

The Kerala State Biodiversity Board discussed the issue in detail and took a decision

against the project considering the rich biodiversity of the area and filed an affidavit at the

Kerala High Court. On mounting pressure from the Government of Kerala for the clearance from


Page3

8

the MOEF, it has asked the WGEEP to examine the issue, along with a few other projects

proposed in the Western Ghats, and give recommendations.

The WGEEP visited the proposed dam site, the reservoir area, and the primitive tribal

settlements at Pokalappara and Vazhzchal, its surroundings and, the downstream

Thumburmuzhi Major Irrigation project (Chalakudy River Diversion Scheme) on 29 January

2011. It had consultations at various levels; with the representatives of the primitive tribals at the

site, the local Panchayath (Athirappilly Panchayath), and the general public who responded to

the WGEEP’s press note inviting those interested to come and give their views.

In addition to these, the WGEEP organized a technical consultation which was attended

to by the experts from the KSEB, CPSS, RRC, KSSP, Kerala Forest Research institute, Kerala

State Biodiversity Board, Tropical botanical Garden and Research Institute), Nature

Conservation Foundation, officers from Kerala State’s departments of Irrigation, Tribal

Department, and Forest & Wildlife. It may be noted that this was the first time that such a

discussion was held between the proponents and opponents of the project. The RRC team

raised a number of significant issues at this technical consultation.

Impact on the availability of wateImpact on the availability of wateImpact on the availability of wateImpact on the availability of water in the downstream Panchayathsr in the downstream Panchayathsr in the downstream Panchayathsr in the downstream Panchayaths

Construction of dam and retention of water for 20 hrs while releasing a portion of it and

releasing 5 -8 times more during four hours at night would certainly affect the flow pattern, which

would affect the irrigation as well as ecology of the area. The downstream irrigation needs of

the ayacut (14000 ha spread across 20 Local Self Governments in the districts of Thrissur and

Ernakulam.) depend on the Chalakudy River Diversion Scheme (CRDS). According to KSEB

the present water discharge from Poringalkuthu Hydro-electric Project, the main source of water


Page3

9

for the Athirappily Project, during lean months is 6.2 -7.6 cumec for 20 hours and 36-38 cumecs

for four hours (peak hours – 6 p.m. to 10 p.m.). The KSEB assures that water to the tune of 7.65

cumec for 20 hours and 36 -38 cumecs for four hours even after the Athirappilly project is

implemented; hence the water available to CRDS will not be affected. While this variation (7.65

– 38 cumec) itself would affect the irrigation, CPSS challenges these figures and points out that

the impact will be more severe. According to them, quoting the figures of 2003 DPR (flow series

from 1970-71 to 2001-02), the present discharge through the river from December to April is

14.92 cumec. Based on the maintenance schedule of generators at Poringalkuthu, the average

flow for 20 hours between December and April is 13.25 cumec and that for four hours is 25- 31

cumec. If the project comes through, the 20 hours flow will reduce from the average 13.25

cumec to 7.65 cumecs and that for four hours it will increase to about 50 cumecs. This will

badly affect irrigation from CRDS. The irrigation needs from CRDS cannot be met with a flow of

7.65 cumec for 20 hrs. The change in the flow pattern would also affect the ground water in the

catchments of the ayacut which in turn would affect the availability of drinking water in the area.

The KSEB did not counter these arguments at the Technical consultation held by the WGEEP at

Chalakudy in January 2011. Water scarcity is already experienced in the downstream

Panchayaths, and salinity intrusion is reported up to 20 km from the coast. Construction of one

more dam and changes in the flow pattern would aggravate the situation.

Availability of Availability of Availability of Availability of water andwater andwater andwater and power generationpower generationpower generationpower generation

Project proponents have provided varied figures on the availability of water:

a. Water availability as per 1999 DPR : 1269 MCM1269 MCM1269 MCM1269 MCM

b.b.b.b. Water availability as per 2003 DPR : 1169 MCM1169 MCM1169 MCM1169 MCM


Page4

0

c. Water availability as per CWC : 1056 MCM1056 MCM1056 MCM1056 MCM

In all these calculations, the water diverted to Idamalayar Diversion Scheme has not

been considered. Data obtained by the RRC from KSEB under RTI show that after deducting

the water made available to the Idamalayar diversion Scheme, only 750 MCM will be available

to the Athirappilly dam. The Central Electricity Authority had calculated the electricity generation

from the project at 233 MU per annum was on the basis of the figures given in 2003 DPR; i.e.

1169 MCM. Since it will only be 750 MCM, the power generation will be reduced accordingly. An

analysis of daily generation and discharge data from Poringalkuthu from 1987 to 2006 (received

under RTI act) suggest that even at 70% dependability the generation at Athirappilly HEP will be

about 170 MU and 210 MU respectively with and without Idamalayar diversion. During the lean

periods (December – May) with the available water, considering the Idamalayar Diversion

Scheme, the power that could be generated will only be less than 25 MU. In case the

Idamalayar Diversion Scheme is stopped as KSEB claims, the major portion of the electricity

that is being generated from that scheme, about 60 MU (as per WAPCOS EIA), will cease to be

available. That means there will be a substantial loss to the total power grid during lean periods,

if the Athirappilly Project comes through.

The total expected power generation from the Athirappilly Project from the figures given

in the documents of the KSEB, disregarding the arguments against it by the RRC and CPSS, is

not commensurate with the project cost even without considering the environmental, ecological

and social costs. Considering a project cost of Rs. 1000 crores and a loan component of Rs.

800 crores (@80% of project cost), the annual interest at 9% alone would come to Rs.72 crores.

With the existing tariff, the revenue from the sale of electricity from the Athirappilly project (if


Page4

1

implemented) will be about Rs. 50 – 55 crores only. This means that even the interest of the

loan for the project cannot be met with the revenue from the project.

Notably enough none of these figures were challenged by the KSEB at the technical

consultation meeting held by the WGEEP at Chalakudy. Evidently, the project has many flaws

and the only justification for it can come from the totally unwarranted profits that will be made by

the contractors and their cronies. The community of Indian scientists and technologists ought

surely to stand as one to participate in a science for social revolution and resist such wasteful

abominations.

Precision agriculturePrecision agriculturePrecision agriculturePrecision agriculture----animal husbandryanimal husbandryanimal husbandryanimal husbandry---- forestry systemsforestry systemsforestry systemsforestry systems

An important constructive contribution of the community of the Indian scientists and

technologists to nation-building can come from devising more information-intensive systems that

reduce demands on the material and energy resources. An excellent example of this comes

from the work of P R Seshagiri Rao, an agricultural scientist-cum-ecologist. Seshagiri comes

from a family of farmers of Pavgada taluka of Tumkur district, a low rainfall, highly drought prone

region of Karnataka. As he grew up he witnessed a transformation of the erstwhile drought

resilient, but subsistence agriculture based on a large basket of crops to commercial agriculture

focusing on groundnut production, a system that has become highly vulnerable to recurring

droughts. Educated in an Agricultural University, he was indoctrinated into the virtues of

intensive chemicalized agriculture, going to the extent of felling down old, well-grown Jamun

trees, because they wasted too much space that was better devoted to growing groundnut,

against his father’s earnest pleadings. He continued to practice agriculture even as he became

a research student in ecology at the Indian Institute of Science(IISc) in Bengaluru. At IISc he


Page4

2

slowly absorbed the values of practicing science as a sceptical enterprise and began to

examine critically the package of practices prescribed by the Agricultural University. He found

that the farmers were very sceptical of the merits of the recommended date of sowing of

groundnut.

He then began a collaboration with the Atmospheric Sciences group at IISc to look

carefully at Pavgada rainfall pattern and verify if there were reasons to question the

recommended date of sowing. It turned out that indeed there were, and the recommendations,

developed for a variety from TN Agricultural University, Coimbatore were inappropriate for the

Pavgada rainfall pattern. Crops sown as recommended reached the pod-filling stage at a time

when long periods of no rain were highly likely at Pavgada, leading to crop failure.

With that he launched on a collaborative investigation of modelling groundnut crop

growth with the Atmospheric Sciences group and work out the consequences of the various

options open to the farmers of a particular region such as Pavgada. The results indicated that

the Pavgada farmers' common sense answer as to when to sow groundnut, at variance with the

recommendations of the Agricultural University was very reasonable. This launched him on a

tripartite collaboration of himself, a trained agricultural scientist-cum-ecologist, the Atmospheric

Scientists of IISc and farmers, many of them illiterate, yet highly knowledgeable. Out of this

grew a heuristic groundnut crop model incorporating information on pest and disease incidence

as reported by the farmers.

As the work progressed, Seshagiri saw that what really mattered was not just fine-tuning

the package of practices for groundnut to local conditions, but to consider alternatives to

groundnut cultivation. He also realized two important shortcomings in the current practice of


Page4

3

rain-fed farming. First, with the 'fixation on solving problems', one forgets to recognize and take

advantage of opportunities for getting good yields. Local wisdom and long term crop model

yield simulations both agree that one of every 5 years is a year of bumper crop of groundnut in

Pavagada region. But most farmers fail to take advantage such good rainfall years, as they do

not invest in high input of nutrients required for such yields. With the limited water holding

capacity of rain-fed farms, large component of the rain in such years is wasted as run-off and

drainage that are not available for crop production. A second short-coming is that both

problems and opportunities are very 'Context Specific'. Quite often, what is a problem for one

crop turns out to be an opportunity for others. Consider, for example, a wet spell during crop

maturity of groundnut that causes major problems of diseases like pod rot, late leaf spot and

difficulty in drying the produce. But, the same event leads to excellent growth and yield of

Pigeon Pea and Castor that are the major intercrops of Groundnut.

With his training in ecology, he decided that what was called for was a re-look at the

management of the agricultural ecosystem as a whole. For a region of highly variable and low

rainfall, seasonal crops dependent on rains at critical life history stages were a poor choice.

Instead, one must consider a mix of perennial crops coupled to building up of a soil moisture

bank that would average out short-term fluctuations in precipitation. The deep and extensive

root systems of such perennial crops are ideally suited to make use of the deep soil water

beyond reach of crop roots. In addition, they reduce runoff and facilitate percolation to deeper

soil layers. The perennial crops themselves would preferably be highly diversified to suit the

specific soil-topography conditions that vary even within a single farmer’s field, as well as to

take advantage of newer marketing opportunities.


Page4

4

Seshagiri thus arrived on his own at a version, particularly suited to Indian conditions, of

what has come to be known as “Precision Agriculture”, a whole farm management concept

developed in the context of American and European agriculture, based on observing and

responding to three sets of context specific variables with the goal of optimizing returns on

inputs while preserving resources. The three sets are -1) intra-farm plot variability of soil, runoff

and slope, 2) long term rainfall variability of the region, 3) Market preferences and opportunities

as well as local production advantages. Precision agriculture management practices that take

advantage of high-tech systems can significantly reduce the amount of nutrient and other crop

inputs used while boosting yields. Farmers thus obtain a return on their investment by saving on

pest and disease control and chemical fertilizer costs. The second, larger-scale benefit of

targeting inputs—in spatial, temporal and quantitative terms—concerns environmental impacts.

Applying the right amount of inputs in the right place and at the right time benefits crops, soils

and groundwater, and thus the entire crop cycle. Consequently, precision agriculture has

become a cornerstone of sustainable agriculture, since it respects crops, soils and farmers.

Seshagiri’s own “Precision Agriculture” system has the additional elements of harvesting and

storage of rain water, addition of organic matter and taking advantage of perennial root systems

to start virtuous ecological cycles. Adopted to Indian conditions, Seshagiri’s system has the

following notable features: 1) the data will be gathered mostly by humans instead of sensors, 2)

communication and data transmission will have a suite of options instead of limited options as in

the west, 3) the data processing will have a large component of heuristics along with standard

simulation models, 4) the rain-fed farming component will include probabilities of success for the

various options provided, 5) the business model of delivering such a service will be mostly


Page4

5

through local small enterprisers (like the ones that run xerox, computers, dtp), 5) use of

multimedia based content with local language as voice and ability take advantage of experience

across languages and contexts, 6) the flood of data from complex systems will need a large

work force to analyze it with skills quite different from those available at present.

Seshagiri was not ideologically committed to eschewing the use of all monocultures or all

chemical or fossil fuel inputs. Coming from a lineage of practical farmers he was aware of the

imperatives of conducting farming operations to yield good economic returns. But as he worked

out his new system of agro-ecosystem management, he decided that it was important to use a

highly diverse mixture of herbs, shrubs and trees that could take advantage of conditions

variable in both space and time and that provided a variety of products such as medicines,

spices, fuelwood, small timber, and fodder for sheep which were the earlier predominant mode

of economic production in the dry tracts of Pavgada. He saw that while groundnut or cereal

prices remained depressed and fluctuated a great deal with season to the disadvantage of the

farmers and to the advantage of the traders, meat prices continued to escalate, and meat

harvests could be so timed as to obviate storage costs afflicting cereals or groundnut.

His idea of creating a moisture bank in the soil suggested the value of enhancing the

organic content of the soil that also built up a nutrient bank. His diversified species mix did not

invite pest and disease attacks so endemic to monocultures. So he devised a sound production

system that completely eschewed all chemical and fossil fuel inputs simply on grounds of

economic efficiency without taking an ideological stand, a highly desirable attribute if the system

is to be adopted by a large number of farmers.

He also realized that large amount of information was required to truly optimize the


Page4

6

practices and fine-tune them to locality and time specific conditions. In particular, the data

needed pertained to physiological and other attributes of the numerous plant species in use,

and the behavior of the soil moisture and nutrient bank. Seshagiri very effectively used the tools

of modern information technology, firstly to garner all available information, which turns out to be

rather limited, and generate new data. In this context, he has developed a very productive

collaboration with the Centre for Electronic Design Technology at the IISc, setting up, as an

example, high-tech systems of soil moisture monitoring and data communication.

His system turns out not only to be resilient in face of weather fluctuations, but

economically far more profitable in comparison with the prevalent groundnut cultivation system.

The only hitches are that [1] to succeed requires waiting for 4-5 years for the revenue stream to

become substantial, and [2] for the farmer to put in a fair amount of collection and management

of information to tailor the system to his particular soil and topographic conditions. To meet

these challenges he has adopted a tow-pronged approach. Firstly, he very successfully takes

on turn-key projects for land owners who are not dependent on farm incomes and can afford the

wait of initial few years. Secondly, he has developed further applications of high-tech tools such

as mobile communication to help collaborating farmers in the task of collection and

management of relevant information. While he charges fees for the turn-key projects, he is

donating his time free of charge as a social service to a growing network of collaborating

farmers who are adopting his ideas.

To my mind, this is a splendid example of how modern science and technologies can be put to

use to benefit both ecology and economy, and take the benefits to farmers, amongst the most

disadvantaged members of our society.


Page4

7

Tracking the sunTracking the sunTracking the sunTracking the sun

I offer another example, more appropriate to the community of Technologists of IIT,

though I realize that unlike with the earlier example my understanding of the issues is quite

limited. This comes from my many conversations with a young Engineer, proprietor of two

companies, Chroma Energy and Scorpius Trackers. Chroma Energy started off working on

Concentrated Photovoltaic systems that focus sun’s rays on specially designed photovoltaic

cells. To succeed the CPV units must track the sun through the day and with seasons. This

required the development of an efficient tracking system. He was able to design a system that

was at once more efficient but required far lighter structures that saved a great deal on materials

and power to run the tracking system, and on money because of greater material and energy

efficiency. The initially designed dual axis tracking system could easily be adapted to single axis

tracking systems in great demand for flat plate photovoltaic devices since tracking increases

efficiencies by a whopping 20%. So he has floated Scorpius Trackers which is likely to tap into a

substantial demand. In all this he has used modern day information technologies very

effectively, providing a solution more appropriate to the present day context.

In conclusionIn conclusionIn conclusionIn conclusion

John Maynard Smith, the distinguished evolutionary biologist has written a book called

“Major Transitions in Evolution”. He lists nine transitions, the first primordial one from freely

dispersing “replicating molecules” to “populations of molecules in protocells” fully 3.8 billion

years ago to the ninth, the last, being that from “ evolution of social animals” to the “evolution of

humans with an open ended language” just 50 thousand years ago. John Maynard Smith

speculates that perhaps we are on the threshold of a tenth major evolutionary transition, from


Page4

8

human use of symbolic language to universal access to global stock of human knowledge,

thanks to the modern developments in science and technology. As we noted above, sharing of

knowledge is what brought humans to a commanding position in the biosphere beginning fifty

thousand years ago. So the next major transition will be drawing upon the fountainhead of what

we are today. But humans are complicated animals, who have not only been sharing, but

attempting to all along to monopolize knowledge as well. In this tussle sharing seems to have an

upper hand today, with most significant repercussions.

But while knowledge is being widely shared, the same technological developments have

also promoted ever greater concentrations of wealth in a few hands. This is because

automation, resulting from the same technological developments is increasingly rendering

human intervention redundant. So the tiny minority in control of technologies is in a strong

position to negotiate in the labour market disempowering the vast majority. Now those who

control technologies have not necessarily made any major contributions to development of

technologies either, they are just clever at managing market forces. Stiglitz cites as a case in

point Bill Gates, contrasting his prestige and wealth with that of Alan Turing, whose seminal

work on the Turing machine led the foundation of modern day computing, but who, persecuted

as a homosexual, ended his life in suicide. Stiglitz also singles out for stinging criticism

American bankers who have benefited tremendously from the facility of instantaneous world-

wide transfer of financial resources, but whose unscrupulous, and on occasion, criminal conduct

has now plunged the world in a grave financial crisis.

While sharing of knowledge is at least 50 thousand years old, control over private

property is a more recent development, beginning with the emergence of settled cultivation and


Page4

9

generation of substantial surpluses in farm production, perhaps 5 thousand years ago. The

concentration of wealth in the hands of land-owning warrior and priestly classes and later in

hands of merchant and industrialist classes has led to many debates, the most notable being

that rooted in Marxism. The Marxist prescription of social ownership of production has not

proven to be successful; the resulting dictatorships have concentrated power in the hands of a

few and abused it roundly. These abuses have not only included abuses of human rights, but

those of environment as well, as happened so spectacularly in East Germany. Notably, at the

same time the capitalist West Germany lent strong support to the environmental movement,

with the Green Party becoming a significant political force. Germany remains today a state with

major commitments to environmental protection, and its entrepreneurs are notable for restrained

behaviour and willingness to accept relatively low levels of returns on their financial

investments, in stark contrast to the greedy American bankers, and economic advisors like Larry

Summers’ who, perhaps ruminating on the Indian response to the Bhopal Gas Disaster wrote in

1991 the notorious World Bank Memo stating: “The measurements of the costs of health

impairing pollution depends on the foregone earnings from increased morbidity and mortality.

From this point of view a given amount of health impairing pollution should be done in the

country with the lowest cost, which will be the country with the lowest wages. I think the

economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable

and we should face up to that.”

To me it appears that democracy, with all its shortcomings, is the best political system

for the day, as is capitalism the best economic system. But as Stiglitz pleads on sound scientific

grounds, the market forces must be socially moderated to ensure that environmental costs are


Page5

0

fully borne by the entrepreneurs, that common property is scrupulously protected, and

concentration of wealth not allowed to pervert the democratic principle of government of people,

by people and for people into a government of one per cent, by one per cent and for one per

cent. This calls for very active citizen participation, with us moving towards direct democracy.

The modern developments in science and technology, with tremendous advances of means of

sharing information, have certainly made it possible for citizens to play a very active role in all

spheres of public life.

At the same time, we have examined many examples of how the one-per-cent rule has

been promoting lawlessness, subversion of the scientific spirit and abuse of fundamental rights

of democratic citizens, as well as environmental degradation on a massive scale in modern day

India. Surely, we the members of India’s community of scientists and technologists have a

crucial role to play in setting things right.

samwad prof.madhav gadgil lecture

Documents

sound logical deductions

coca cola plant

extremely reductionist approach

primitive tribal groups

ecologically sensitive zones

justice shah commissions

lote abhyas gat

respective gram sabhas