Study of green movements
N. R. KRISHNAN
|
Analysis of ecological movements in the Third World
|
WHY PEOPLE PROTEST: Subhash Sharma; Pub. by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, Soochna Bhavan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003. Rs. 190.
This is an analysis of the theory and practice of ecological movements in general and a study of six such movements in the Third World from a sociological and socio-economic standpoint. The work is based primarily on research conducted by Subhash Sharma of the University of Manchester, United Kingdom, and draws upon data from secondary sources. Three of these movements took place in India — the Chipko movement in Uttarakhand, the ‘Save the Silent Valley’ campaign in Kerala, and the Narmada Bachao Andolan in Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat. The other three are: the ‘Anti-Chico Dam’ protest in Philippines, the anti-timber concession movement in Sarawak in East Malaysia, and the historic Amazonia Rubber Tappers’ struggle in Acre, Brazil, hallowed by the martyrdom of Chico Mendes.
Validity
The author tests the validity of six hypotheses in his study of green movements in the South. These hypotheses are: the movements are spontaneous; they focus on ‘critical life issues’ of livelihood, spirituality, and morality; the people themselves are in the vanguard of the movements; their goal is to challenge the hegemony and dominance of the state over natural resources and to promote an indigenous paradigm of development; the state is neutral to the ecological issues highlighted by the protests; and political parties have little or no interest in such movements.
The first three hypotheses are applicable fully to all the movements studied. Barring the Silent Valley campaign that was launched by scientists and intellectuals, the rest have been peoples’ movements truly. At the core of all these protests lay a deep feeling of disempowerment and questioning of state sovereignty over natural resources and threat of loss of livelihoods and erosion of local cultures brought about by development as practised today.
The infusion of outside elements by the state to exploit natural resources has always been anathema to the locals, particularly the tribal population, who had always enjoyed unrestricted access to the resources. The colonial history of many of the Third World countries and the constitutional legacy they inherited from the colonisers had much to do with the protests whether it was the Chipko movement in India or the rise of the Dayaks in Sarawak against the timber concessions extended to outsiders or the opposition of Brazil’s native rubber-tappers to the farming out of land to agriculturists brought from outside and to the destruction of natural rubber trees to make way for roads and other infrastructure. Implied in the protests was the message that alternative development strategies could, and should, be tried though no one, not even the protesters, had ever articulated in detail what those strategies were. It becomes clear that disruption of traditional life styles and cultures had been at the heart of most of the protests.
Role of NGOs
An interesting point thrown up by Subhash Sarma is the role of outsiders — that is the NGOs and the intellectuals — in organising and guiding the movements. In the Indian context, that had indeed been the rule rather than the exception. In respect of the Chipko movement, it could not, of course, be said that Sunderlal Bahuguna or Chandi Prasad Bhatt were outsiders. But Narmada found many champions from ‘outside’. The role of multilateral and bilateral financial institutions in bankrolling development projects in ecologically sensitive spots in the Third World has been phenomenal, a point which should have been looked into in some detail.
The question of neutrality of the state in green protests is a purely rhetorical one. Contrary to the hypothesis set out by the author, his own enumeration of events in all the protests shows that the state had always assumed, except in the case of Silent Valley, an adversarial role. Here again, a distinction needs to be drawn between India and the other countries in the Third World, and within India between the Centre and the States. The Centre has, by and large, not been unsympathetic to green demands. But in a federal democracy, reconciling the pulls and pressures from different directions has been a challenge to the Centre. The author could have examined this aspect at some length.
Finally, the role of the judiciary in India in fostering environmental consciousness among the public and enforcing accountability on the part of the state has not received any attention. On the role of political parties, the author has shied away from making any definitive observation though he sees leftist involvement in some of the protests. Whatever be the experience elsewhere, ecological issues have failed to ignite the conscience of political groups in India.
The NGOs and students of sociology would find the book useful for its excellent coverage of the theories of social unrest and their application to the study of ecological protests.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Book Review
