CONCLUSION - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/14235/11/11_chapter...
Transcript of CONCLUSION - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/14235/11/11_chapter...
CHAPTER VI
CONCLUSION
The history of mankind is replete with several
challenges, deeds and misdeeds of all kinds through the
ages. The problem of hunger, drought, poverty and
ailments may differ from region to region, but the
paradigm of changes in the planetary systems are a
problem of universal concern. The report of World
Commission on Environment and Development reminds
us:
From space, we see a small and fragile ball dominated not by human activity and edifice but by a pattern of clouds, oceans, greenery, and soils. Humanities1 inability to fit its doings into that pattern is changing •••• Many such changes are accompanied by life-threatening hazards. This new reality, from which there is no escape, must be recognized and managed. 1
one finds an increasing pressure build up on
our globe in which there is an increasing jeopardy for
the living beings in the years to come. Scientists have
reminded us of the dangers of the ozone effects on the
1 1-lorld Commission on Environment and Development, "From one Earth to one world", our Common Future (OXford University Press, 1987), p. 1.
- 171 -
172
earth. The environmental decay caused by different kinds
of air and water-pollutants have tampered with the natural
growth of the species and brought about alarming results.
Deforestations caused by senseless destruction of woods
by people has shifted the direction of nature. Enormous
increase in the population has added to a new dimension
in this regard. Scarcity of natural resources are being
acutely felt. The ruthless exploitation of natural
resources with a heavy emphasis on destruction-oriented
industries, viz., chemicals, nuclear-waste, green house
gases - CFCs, fossil-fuel combustion, agricultural
chemicals, other air-pollutants - sulphur dioxide,
nitrogen oxide, carbon-monoxide, toxic emissions, acid
rain, nitrates, carbon monoxides, are a constant threat
to the entire civilization.
On the other hand, a social scientist is
sometimes led to believe that several of such cited
illustrations are not necessarily a problem as much as
they have been pronounced by some people. Nature has
bountiful embrace and has a limitless canvas to absorb
shocks of all kinds. Human beings are merely fragnent
of nature • s creation in the universe. What has been
termed destruction is the cycle of recreation in the
context of woods and other so-called exploitable
co~onents of nature. Some of these scientists tend
to believe that even the green-house effects are being
173
exaggerated. The data of global-warming has been
subjected to further scrutiny. The record of the
billions of years is yet not so accurately measurable as
to give a definitive-vantage point of our prognosis in
such matters.
Yet another premise has been advanced by
experts in this controversy. They suggest that this
is a part of parochial, need-based, vested interest, of
some highly industrialized nations who wish to perpetrate
the dependence of develoing countries on the developed
ones. The sophisticated technologies available in
industrialized countries, the level of research and
innovative measures accessible in these countries tend
to leave the developing world far behind for emulative
reasons.
As a result, there build3 up a demand for such
technologies in these regions and their economic
dependence becomes a fact of 1 ife to the advantage of
industrialized world. The argument, therefore, is that
such regions must borrow technology and become victims
of economic neo-colonialism. The north-south dialogue,
the problems of GA'rl', the Group of seventy-Seven and
disputes on Intellectual Property Rights, are some of
the seamy sides of this argument. It is in that sense
that India has been caught-up in an ongoing debate
with the united States.
174
Although the United States and India belong
to two different categories - one developed and the
other developing worlds - nonetheless, the environmental
degeneration is faced with identical stresses and strains
in both the countries. The modernization, technological
and scientific advancement has led to increasing air,
water and land pollution through mobile and immobile
sources including the dumping of toxic and nuclear
wastes. Again, the evergrowing needs of the population,
increased urbanization and industrialization have created
the problem of fast depleting natural resources,
deforestation, desertification, acid-precipitation,
greenhouse effect and global warming. And, both the
countries have to face this adversity of earth-
life.
There are some significant sectors of life
where us and India have to strive hard to come to terms
with nature. In this context another problem conmon to
both could be the concern for energy conservation. It
would include the problem of convincing the masses
about efficient use of energy, creating renewable
sources of energy through recyc 1 ing and waste
incineration, and increasing use of alternative
175
or non-conventional energy sources like hydro-power,
solar, tidal, bio-gas, wind-power, geothermal etc.
The rivers in both the countries have been
polluted due to the growing industrial set up. The DDT
factories, tanneries, pulp and paper mills, fertilizer
co~lexes, petro-chemical units etc. use the river as
a sink for effluent.1 However, Indian cities are faced
with the problem of seweaoe· facilities. out of 3,119
towns and cities, only 209 have sewage treatment facili-
ties with only eight having full facilities, as pointed
out by the Commission on Health and Environment of the
World Health Organization. 2 Delhi is said to receive
3 about 200 million litres of untreated sewage per day.
Another case in India is that of pollution
through road transport which has been on the increase
all over the .developing world due to fast pace of life,
introduction of fuel-economy vehicles and enhanced
living-standards, along with fast urbanization. In
Delhi alone, more than 17 lakh vehicles have been
registered. There has been a marl<ed increase in
particulates, sulphur-dioxide, oxide, hydro carbons
4 and carbon-mon_ocide in the atmosphere. various
1 WHO, "Indian Rivers,. A Health Hazard•, Times of India, 18 March 1992.
2 Ibid. 3 Ibid.
4 Editorial, "Curbing Pollution : People's Movement Needed", Times of India, 17 March 1992.
176
measures have been taken to curb the automobile pollution
like setting pollution control boards and standards,
educating the public on environmental and health hazards
etc. Penalty alone cannot check pollution. There
should be adequate facilities for repairs, use of lead
free petrol, strict and honest implementation of
pollution regulatory laws.
Above all, citizens in general should try to
use 'austerity' measures in using resources and simplify
5 their consumption habits.
on the other hand, if we cast our cursory
glance on the us position, it has been argued that it
has been the leading producer of the carbon di-oxide
emissions which is believed to be the most important
cause of climate warming. Hence, it is vital that
the us takes initiative to a world-wide scheme tQ
prevent such a warming.
James E. Hansen - Director of NASA's Goddard
Institute for Space Studies - in mid 1988, after testi
fying, claimed that the unusually hot summer of.1988
illustrated th!t global climate warming was under way,
also known as the • Greenhouse effect • • Hence, Hansen
5 Suggested by Mr s. Bahuguna, personal dialogue, JNU, New Delhi, 16 August 1994.
177
accomplished what the environmental movement could not,
in its many years• labour.
According to data demonstrations, the amount
of co2 in the atmosphere has been increasing since
the beginning of Industrial Revolution in mid-19th
century and by mid 20th century, fossil fuel combustion,
mostly from world-wide coal-burning and motor vehicles,
was the primary source of co2 emissions and during the
last several decades, deforestation has created additional
co2 emissions •
The Greenhouse theory asserts that the
increasing co2 would gradually trap more of the earth's
heat steadily, warming the global climate as much as
three to nine degrees which in turn would greatly
accelerate the melting of the polar icecap altering
·world climate zones. However, some experts cite other
causes for climate warming like solar activity and
terrestrial volcanoe~still others do not accept the
existing evidence as sufficient explanations for
future warming. It is in this disagreement, among
experts, that forces policy makers 'become scientific
judges and scientists become salesmen in the struggle
determining whose data would govern policy decisions.
In other words, the proponents of reducing us's share
of co2 emissions lack a firm public and scientific
178
consensus to add political weight to their advocacy,
thus failing to give proper place to the issue of global
warming in US Federal Policy agenda. such kind of
explanations have made the task more difficult for the
researchers. India faces an uphill task along with the
US in this regard.
Acid Precipitation
A public opinion poll conducted in 1988 by
the National Nildlife Federation revealed that about
75 per cent of the public regarded acid rain a "very
serious" problem. 6 The most cormnon chemicals responsible
for acid precipitation are sulphur and nitrogen oxides
emission from fossil fuel combustion and metal smelting.
These gases are captured by high altitude winds and
transported mil~s away from their origin. In the
process, they transformed into sulphate and nitrate
aerosols, then join with other airborne chemical~ like
ozone and hydrogen petroxide, volatile organic compounds,
water, to become more COIJt>lex chemicals, which later
return to the earth in the form of water or ice crystals.
Microscopic sol ids of heavy metals are known as
microparticulates. According to estimates, approximately
6 As reported in New York Times, 25 september 1988.
179
60-70 per cent of acid precipitation (in rain/snow) was
found containing sulphuric acid and remaining nitric
7 acid.
Compared to earlier, the acid rain now is
far more acidic and widespread, primarily due to increase
in fossil-fuel combustion, due to electric utilities and
industry. Though us may be the leader, so far as discharge
of acid rain is concerned, discharging around 41 metric
tonnes of nitrogen and sulphur oxides,· however such
precipitation is world-issue today, as it is discharged
by all industrialized nations.
The first warning against acid rain~ as a
global problem, came in early 1970s when scientists
discovered that large number of Swedish lakes failed to
maintain a normal biological process due to high acid
contents. The water in many lakes was sparkling clear
and peaceful, as the acid had destroyed all life in it.8
7 walter A. Rosenbaum, The Politics of Environmental Concern (New York: Praeger PUblishers, 1973), p. 48.
8 Ross Howard and Michael Parley, Acid-Rain (New York: McGraw Hill Publishers, 1982), p. 21.
180
In US the northern part showed signs of alarming acidi-
fication, which appeared damaging for the forests, forest
soil, agricultural land and related eco-systems. By
1980s, evidence showed that acid rain was economically
as well as ecologically costly and pervasive throughout
'the us. 9
According to docurrented sources of New York
Times, 24 July 1988, 7 July 1989, the following evidence
has been recorded:
(a) Massive dying of red spruce and other trees along the Appala-C»fans from Maine to Georgia in 1988 with the pollution having originated in Ohio and Tennessee River valleys.
(b) surveys in several lakes of New York's Adirondack Mountains, revealed such an extent of acidic content that 1/4th of fish were difficult to support while 1/5th were regarded •endangered' • 10
Although considerable pressure was exerted by the environ
nentalists and by the States that were affected adversely
by acid rains, Washington's response was not adequate to
the problem of acid rain.
The Re~gan Administration, in its later
stage, did concede the acid rain problem, signing
9 Rosenbaum, n. 7, p. 65.
10 Ibid., p. 65.
181
thereby in 1988 an international protocol, that had
committed US in 1994 to limit· its nitrogen emissions
to 1987 level • The BUsh administration went a step
further, by proposing to amend the Clear Air Act, to
recuce both sulphur and nitrogen oxide emissions,
significantly at its earliest. The environmentalists
are pressing for a faster and internalised cuts in
pollution emissions while the affected States are
reluctant to agree upon the distribution of the cost,
the utili ties and industries to be regulated. They are
further divided on t~e regulatory formula to be accepted
by them.11
Atmospheric ozone Depletion
It was first suggested in 1974 by scientists
that the world-wide use of CFCs or chlorofluoro carbons
could destroy the thin tropospheric ozone layer
encircling the earth at a height of 43,000 ft (approx.).
By 1982, British scientists discovered existence of a
large hole in ozone layer over Antaret.icl and further
research confirmed chemical depletion of ozone layer
at an alarmingly faster rate. By 1990, large ozone
hole was discovered over the Arctic, pointing at the
11 Ibid., pp. 66-67.
182
possibility of rapid depletion in more temperate
zones.
NASA's ozone Trends Panel, announced in 1988,
an estimate of 3 per cent of ozone depletion between
12 1969 and 1986. The tropospheric ozone being a
natural shield against the sun's ultraviolet rays, any
significant depletion of ozone layer could mean greater
human exposure to such rays yielding increased risks of
13 skin cancer and eye damage. An estimated depletion
of 1 per cent of atmospheric ozone creates 3 to 15
million new skin cancer cases and 555 thousand to 2.8
million cataract cases born 14 before the year 2075.
The properties that make these chemicals so
scientifically and commercially desirabl~ at the same
time, make them a menace to the ozone layer, such
properties being: stability, non-corrosiveness,
non-toxic, non-flammable. These CFCs and halons once
released in the atmosphere, slowly travel upward,
12 Cynthia Pollock Shea, Protecting Life on Earth : steis to Save the ozone Laf:r (washington, D.C.: wor dWatch Institute, 1988~ pp. 12-13.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid., p. 14.
183
chemically interact with ozone destroying it, over a
long period of time. India and the developing countries
are led to believe that currently the US manufactures
about 30 to 34 per cent of world's CFC supply. Indeed,
all industrialized nations are heavy CFC users and
producers.
Since developing nations consume increasing
amounts of CFCs and halons in the process of expansion,
the future availability of these chemicals in Third World
is threatened too. India cannot be an exception to it.
It has been estimated that the cost of replacing CFCs
and Lalons seems modest as compared to the prospective
benefits. The EPA itself held that phasing out US use
of CFCs and Lalons would cost 27 billion (dollars) by
the year 2075, but save 6 .s trillion dollars from cancer
death averted and other medical treatment, preventing
crop damage and saving fish population.15 In 1987,
US along with 24 other nations signed the Montreal
Protocol, calling for 50 per cent reduction in the
production of CFCs by the end of the cen~ury and a
1989 freeze in production at 1986 levels. Further, in
response to a later agreement by the European Community
nations to eliminate all ozone depleting chemicals by
15 Reported in New York Times, 21 September 1987.
184
this century end, the Bush Administration made it
another significant US commitment. The major US
manufacturer of CFCs- El du Pont de Nemours - has
announced its intention to phase out all CFC production
as fast as possible.16
A New Politics for a New Era
A political agenda for the 1990s is under way.
The us, in 1990, observed the nation's second Earth Day,
two decades since the historic environmental movement in
1970. The first decade of the environmental era seemed
very promising with the EPA elevated close to the cabinet
status and its budget increased the amendments to Clean
Air Acts, converted into law, thereby, returning the
environmental sensibility to the ~~ite House and Congress.
Then the Montreal Protocol marked enough indication of
us commitment to global cooperation in combating man
made climate degradation. The second Earth Day testified
not merely the survival, but also the prevalence of the
movement, after troubled times of Reagan period.17
A veteran public opinion analyst, william
Sch~Yder, during the post-Second Earth Day, noted that
16 Ibid.
1 7 Rosenbaum, n. 7 •
185
enviromrental ism had become so much a part of the Arrerican
values that 76 per cent. of Arrericans in Gallop Poll dubbed
themselves as •environmentalists•. In other words,
environnentalism has become part of the "Anerican 18 Consensus", believe most public opinion analysts.
Leading environmental scholars have from time
to tine attributed the growth and achievement of the
environmental movement to the ongoing metamorphosis in
the American public belief that has significantly built
a broad consensus about environmentalism.
Placing the us experience, in a global pers
pective, Lynton Coldwell holds:
During the last half of the twentieth century, societal changes seem to have occurred spontaneously in North America and western Europe. Manners and morals, attitudes ••• life styles followed a parallel course, and concern for the environment was a major dimension of the change. Globalizing of American environmentalism is ••• globalizing of environmental movements everywhere. It is a manifestation of a worldwide trend. 19
Experiencing the paradigm-shift (change in
attitude), Ronald McDonald, owner of a fast-food
18 William SchnAader, "Everybody's an Environmentalist Now", National Journal (USA), 28 April 1990, p. 106 •
19 Rosenbaum, n. 7, p. 300.
186
corporation, claims that the McDOnalds have been dis
tributing a ten page brochure of recycled paper, assuring
its patrons of the former's "commitment to environ
mentally sound business policies". 20
Indeed, the backbone to the political future
of environmentalism is provided by public opinion which
has proven to be an equalizer (mediator) between political
contraction of the environmentalists and their opponents.
Not only has public opinion been rallied by environmen-
talists for political purposes, rather it has provided
an incentive for business compliance with environmental
regulation by creating apprehension among major image
conscious American firms that they could be termed as
'polluters• by the public.
However, a critical assessment of American-
environmentalism about the public strength behind American
environmentalism raises profound questioning. While
contemporary public opinion polls, on the one hand,
reported of majority American support for environmental
protection. and regulation, but at the same time, it
expressed American demands of accelerated energy
production and conservation without broad compromises
20· Ibid.
187
in environmental protection. In the context, Riky
Dunlap, in his analysis of public support for environ
mentalism, concludes: "The intensity ••• of public concern
for environmental quality ••• may not be as high as it is
21 for economic well-being."
In modern market-place ideas, environmentalism,
o.Scill3.tes between two sharply opposed views of human
predicament - the vision of an economist and that of the
biologist. The first philosophy, acknowledging no
natural limits to economic growth while the second only
recognizing such limits. From within the environmental
moverrent there flow three generic responses to indus-
trialization - the three environmental philosophies of
the time - agrarianism, wilderness-thinking and
scientific industrialism, in a way reflecting three
perceptives on human-nature relationship. Scientific
industrialism and wilderness-thinking advocate the
conquest of nature and human submission to natural
processes, respectively, while agrarianism reflecting
none other than the search for a •golden mean• or
21 Riley E. Dunlap, "Public Opinion and Environmental Policy", in James P. Lester, ed., Environmental Politics and Policl : Theories and Evidence (Durham, N.C.: nuke univers ty Press, 1989), p. 13o.
188
balance between • stewardship • and • sustainable
use•. 22
Agrarianism is critical of both the primitive
society (where life was believed to be nasty, brutal
and short) and the industrial society (where mankind
has succumbed to the pursuit of wealth). The ecologically
and socially ideal system, according to this school, has
been the peasant society, where human have had an active,
not dominant, relationship with the nature (land). In
other words, the political philosophy of agrarianism
therefore has been to oppose the • onslaught of
commercialism and industrialism• 23 where they have not
made inroads •
The wilderness thinking has been an environ-
mental philosophy firmly entrenched in the US - evident
from the widespread agreement within the US wilderness
movement to protect and expand the system of national
parks. One set of thinkers of the school views nature
22 Ramchandra Guha, "Toward a Cross-cultural Environmental Ethic•, Alternatives (Boulder), vol. 15, no. 4, fall 1990, pp. 433-s.
23 Ibid, authors own words, p. 433.
189
appreciation as an indication of a flourishing culture
emphasising the need for co-existence of automobiles,
power plants, national parks, rivers and universities.
The other se~ rather radical, supports primitive or pre-
agrarian society. According to them, the victory of
agriculture marked a fall in ecological wisdom,
however, the national park movement meant a positive
step towards new development. Industrialism meant a
further gap between human and nature. Primitive
society was reared in the lap of nature, which, however,
was disrupted by the civilization that •increased
separation between the individual and the natural world
as it did the child from the mother". 24
Scientific industrialism is the only philosophy
that is forward-looking, emphasizing the fact that human
salvation lies in the future, not in reverting back to
the past civilizations. Therefore, the task ahead
would be to mould industrialism by removing its
throw-away culture or wastefulness. Scientific
expertise can skilfully direct industrialism towards
an eco-friendly, positive and sustainable form of
development based on a rational use of natural resources,
crucial enough for human sustenance and welfare.
24 Paul Shepard, Nature and Madness (San Francisco: Sierra Club BookS, 1982), pp. 3-7. See for further details pp. 28-39.
190
Depicting the environmental philosophies of
two different cultures, the US and India present two
large and ecologically varying democracies. The two
have strikingly different religious traditions and
dissimilar economic systems - one as most powerful
post-industrial, post-material society, the other a
populous, and largely agricultural country, seeking
rapid industrialization.
vfuile the dominant environmental philosophy .. behind the Indian movement is agrarianism, in US, it
is wilderness thinking.
The movement in Indi~ is based on the traditions
of Mahatma Gandhi. Four decades after independence too,
agrarianism has revived, as economic planning for
industrialization with devastating effects on country's
natural wealth failed to solve the c~ucial problem of
poverty. The Indian environmental movement has been
greatly influenced by Gandhi's anti-industrial
philosophy with its more vocal sections giving call
for reverting back to the community based village
centered economic order.25
25 Guha, n. 22, p. 439.
191
Agrarianism has a strong current in the US
history too, nevertheless, as a philosophy of social
reconstruction it differs from the Indian component.
The latter implied the spirit of corranunity and the
forner invoked the spirit of independence. The idea
of private proprietorship of land, based on Jefferson's
imagination, indicated the individualist-spirit - the
edifice of democracy.
The core of US environnental roovenent has,
of course, been the wilderness ethic and the wilderness
lovers seem more hostile to agriculture. Nature to them
implies not land but wilderness. India, in this regard,
provides a contrast - though having a greater ecological
diversity, the movement for protection of wild areas
has not been much popular, as in the us. The support
for national parks and sanctuaries have mainly come
from international conservation organizations.
Thus, with regard to the theories of
agrarianism and wilderness thinking, the two countries
present a marked contrast as the wilderness ethic - 'the
dominant tradition of the us is hostile to agriculture.
Agriculture on the other hand - the dominant theme of
Indian tradition - is not favourably disposed towards
wilderness. However, in context of scientific
192
industrialism, the two countries present a marked
similarity.
In both the nations, forestry experts and
irrigation engineers uphold large-scale centralized
and ex-pert-controlled resource managenent. In other
words, scientific industrialism has become a hostile
factor to the environmental movenent in both the
countries. In us, the river~ in their natural state
and forests are cherished by environmentalists for their
beauty and ecological value, while the policy of total
protection pursued by the resource-managers pose a
hurdle in augmenting economic growth.
In India the conflict revolves around the
idea of alternative uses i.e., huge dams and commercial
forestry have been criticized by the environmentalists,
not only for diversion of resources from subsistence
farming towards industrial and commercial uses, but also
for being ecologically unsustainable in the long
run.
The Indian situation appears to defy solutions
of various kinds, which include air-pollution, water
pollution, land-degradation and several other subsidiary
aspects of the environment. The NGOs in India are
struggling hard on two fronts. First, they wish to.
193
coerce the state-apparatus for providing better vistas
towards iiJt>roving the environmental 1 ife in India;
second, they wish to make the people aware of the grim
situation prevailing on degradation of environment,
which can be controlled by human efforts. India cannot
abstain from its own share of ecological decadence.·
Political corruption, nepotism, misappropriation of funds,
mis-directed and directionless safety measures towards
upgradation of environnent will have to be checkmated
with societal forces, voluntary or otherwise.
Although poverty, scarcity of resources, lack
of sophisticated technology and lack of several such
other instruments deserve sympathetic consideration, they
cannot, nevertheless, be cornerstone of India's dilemma.
The West and the United States, in particular, cannot
escape a share in the environmental degradation without
footing the bill for redeeming it. One is reminded of
a comment made in a newspaper by an NGO in London,
which is called the FOE newspaper (a bi-annual
publication):
26
By definition, development cannot be sustainable if it exacerbates the gap between rich and poor, and by enhancing the status of the former obliges the latter to destroy the environment on which they depend. This holds on a national and equa1ly global level. 26
194
India and the united States, are, thus,
partners in a common goal --the •environment upgradation•.
Although the challenges,the logistics and the tactics,
differ in the respective areas of the two societies in
facing the problem, but the sky, t~ air, the planet
earth are the same wherein we live and and have a future to
share. If that be the spirit, the coumonality of
interest and approach can always be explored •
•••••