How much should a person consume?
A statement (by it self) contentious to the core! I am not sure exactly why Ramchanda Guha choose it to be the best suited title, but it was definitely one of the main points this books raises for discussion.
A little about Ramchandra Guha before I proceed. Padma Bhusan, Foreign Policy Magazine’s Top 100 Intellectuals, brilliant writer, incisive debater on CNN-IBN, IIM-C alumnus, rational environmentalist (if he is, I think so), objective historian, PhD dissertation on social history of Indian forests, columnist with Teleghaph and Hindu, definitely good looking, etc. Not necessarily in the order I have listed. Wikipedia him. Else: http://www.charlierose.com/guest/view/6243.
The book begins with a quote by Eugene O’Neill, “…condemned to be one of those who has to see all sides of a question….” Guha has succeeded in seeing many sides if not all of environmentalist movements. Contrasting environmentalism in US and India, he highlights the similarities and the clear class and thought distinction in the movement’s resting place within these parts of the globe.
The chapter uno begins with defining “disciplinary chauvinism,” which most of us suffer from to some extent. To me an ‘air pollution researcher’ (put simply) environment is mostly about how clear the view is when I look at downtown LA from my lab window. Whether I can see the Hollywood sign or the San Gabriels, and the manifestations of when all this is not visible. Basically, my environmentalism, apart from nature and wilderness appreciation, is an environmental degradation problem for which an engineered solution can be strived. That is what keeps me in business. Environmentalism to me doesn’t mean “Narmada Bachao,” which I think is a amalgamation of taking a confused high moral ground to block the ebb and flow of economic evolution spurred by an instinct to be a savior disguised under ecological paradigms!, more than environmentalism. (I do agree with them on some ecological points, but there is always a price to pay!) Environmentalism is to each its own, air and water belongs to all (not equally anymore), but I picked up this book to understand what environmentalism is in other forms and how to put it in context of economics.
This takes us to chapter 3 where the author discusses three environmental utopias as imagined by different genres of environmentalists, in context of environmental history - Primitivism (wilderness movement, nature’s right to exist as in of itself), Agrarianism (social justice, peoples rights to yield sustainably) and Scientific Industrialism (progress and policy guided by experts). He further discusses the ‘biocentric’ and ‘anthroprocentic’ attitudes. In all, this chapter is an excellent introduction to various genres of environmentalists.
Chapter 2, 4 and 5 [The Indian Road to Sustainability, Democracy in the Forest, Authoritarianism in the Wild] discuss the various environment movements in India. As always the author has succeeded in putting the history of the movements and the personalities involved in succinct but appropriately detailed manner. You would come to appraise the idea – agrarianism environmentalism, the dominant philosophy in Indian context. Chapter 4 goes into the history of state forestry in India and examined the models success, more so socially. I believe the economic tragedy of Indian forests is well known. Discussing the fallout of authoritarianism in Chapter 5, I thought the success stories of such reserves were amiss. The chapter focused on the creation of ecological refugees by “green missionaries”. It can certainly be the dominant thought for a sociologist, however looking at it from a holistic point of view, since we are not living in a world with isolated societies or clusters in our small reserves; and more often than we want choices made in one affect the other. Thus, there is a price to bear for preserving exotic species for posterity and that price is often unjust to those who are on the same side as wildlife preservers. The plight of tribals evicted from reserves is a negative externality of the way our societies have evolved, and so is ‘Authoritarianism in the Wild.’ However, Guha succeeds in these chapters in not only asking the right questions but also answering them.
Chapter 6 and 7 discuss the ideologies of Lewis Mumfold and Chandi Prasad Bhatt. Like the whole book, these chapters are written with a personal lyricism ad lead into Chapter 8 The Democratic Social ecology of Madhav Gadgil, where the idea of social justice finds solace, both in the man himself and the chapter. This was certainly the most agreeable part of the book. The crux of Gadgil’s ideology being the harmony between: ecology, equity and efficiency! Democratic indeed! The concluding chapter is one that book’s title is namesake for. Examining the contemporary society’s “preoccupation with production and productivity,” he juxtaposes it with the idea of possible consequences for the environment if India or China takes to it as has the West. From Gandhi to Galbraith, the critique of “indefinite multiplicity of wants,” is justly put sans environmental romanticism.
Summing it up, the books ends on a question that will dominate our times and the inherent pragmatism in Guha’s writing is one of the major strengths of this book. Free of any utopian imagination, the scholarly suggestions for policy problems in most chapters are not a la mode in writings on environmental causes. Totally, worth reading!
