The Perils (And Promises) Of Environmental Extremism
Much water — most of it polluted — has flowed under the bridge since the Stockholm Conference of 1972, when most non-Western Governments rejected environmentalism as a Western fad. However, there is now widespread recognition that environmental degradation is pervasive in the Third World, where deforestation, soil erosion and various forms of pollution are affecting the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of mostly poor people.
The history of colonial exploitation, population pressure and continuing economic dependence on the West are some of the reasons why the ecological crisis in the Third World is an issue of survival. An exaggerated concern for the protection of pristine habitats, while continuing resource-wasteful lifestyles, is the form of "environmental extremism" most characteristic of Western environmentalists.
In India over the past decades, three distinct ideologies have emerged within the environmental movement. The first, deeply influenced by Gandhiism, views environmental degradation as a moral problem caused by the ideology of materialism, which draws humans away from nature and encourages them to consume more and more resources. Gandhians argue that the essence of Eastern cultures is their relative hostility to economic trends — and that by adopting Western models of industrial development, India is, in effect, abandoning its cultural roots. They call for a return to the pre-colonial village society, which they uphold as the exemplar of ecological and social harmony. Their practical emphasis, meanwhile, has been on raising consciousness, in carrying their message of moral regeneration across the country and, indeed, the globe.
The second trend, in many ways the polar opposite of the first, is Marxist in inspiration. Marxists see the problem in political and economic terms, arguing that it is unequal access to resources, rather than the question of values, which better explains the patterns and processes of environmental degradation. In a sharply stratified society, the rich destroy nature in pursuit of profit, while the poor do so simply to survive. The creation of a more economically just society, therefore, is a logical pre-condition of social and ecological harmony. In their practical emphasis, Marxists concentrate on organising the poor for collective action and working towards the redistribution of property and wealth, which is their larger goal. Far from opposing industry, Marxists believe that in a socialist society, industrialisation can proceed much faster and without the byproducts one associates with it in its capitalist variant.
Gandhians and Marxists can be seen as the ideological and political "extremists" of the Indian environmental movement. In between, occupying the middle ground, are a number of environmental groups which are striving for a balance between industry and agriculture, West and East, consciousness-raising and political organisation. However, in their practical emphasis, these groups have focused more on constructive work at the local level, specifically on programmes of eco-restoration and generation of environmentally benign "appropriate" technologies.
All three ideological tendencies are present in the most famous of Third World environmental initiatives — Chipko. The Gandhian trend, associated above all with the inspirational figure of Sunderlal Bahuguna, is perhaps best known outside the Himalaya. The Marxist trend within Chipko is represented by the Uttarakhand Sangharsh Vahini, a youth organisation which has coordinated several militant movements in opposition to commercial forestry, unregulated mining, and the illegal liquor trade in the hills. Finally, the "intermediate" strand is represented by the organisation under whose auspices the movement began, the Dashauli Gram Swarajya Sangh. While advocating an alternative strategy of economic development, which would be more labour intensive and energy conserving than the present model, the Sangh workers quickly realised that to consolidate the gains of the movement, struggle must be followed by constructive work. In the last decade, they have organised a major tree-planting effort in which — strikingly -the leadership was provided by women, and the survival of saplings has been very high.
Because of their ideological purity and internal consistency, the arguments of the Gandhians and Marxists are compelling (though to different sets of people). They are able to capture the rhetorical high ground in a manner that the third, more eclectic, strand cannot. The perils of environmental "extremism", on the other hand, lie in the inability of both Gandhians and Marxists to see alternate points of view or, indeed, to change their own point of view to keep up with changes in the social and natural environment. The promise of environmental "extremism" ties in keeping the third strand constantly on its toes. Without the Gandhians, the intermediate strand would lapse into the belief that appropriate technologies can be implemented without any change in values, and without the Marxists, into the hope that it can be done without changes in the distribution of power.
As readers would have guessed, I find the third strand (although, at least in this article, it goes without a name!) to incorporate the most balanced assessment and the most fruitful programme. Yet, the Gandhians and Marxists are playing an invaluable part in widening the horizons of the debate. Environmental "extremism" has both perils and promises, although its opponents see only the former, its votaries the latter.
Ramachandra Guha recently moved from the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, to the Institute for Economic Growth, Delhi University.