BOOK REVIEW

TOWARDS GREEN VILLAGES: A strategy for environmentallysound and participatory rural development

by Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain, New Delhi: Centre for Science & En-vironment 1989 pp. 52.

Eocology and environmental concerns constitute serious business today. Agitationsapart, great deal of money is available or unavailable depending upon the stand

one takes on these questions. Faced with criticisms of environmental insensitivity inboth the biggest lender (U.S.A.) and the biggest borrower (India) countries, WorldBank has been spurred into action, injecting "environmental awareness" in its lend-ing-for-development operations through the help of hired environmental consultantsand floating proposals of "debt for nature swap" programmes aimed at protectingthe forests and thus the globe. In our own situation, we have seen the ongoingdebates(?) between the "development" oriented people and the environmentalists inthe contexts of Tehri dam and the Sagar/Sarovar across the Narmada.

The development-environment nexus in our situation has been highlighted for overa decade by the existence of movements such as the Chipko Andolan. In the docu-ment under review, a design is proposed whereby some kind of partial resolutionof the contradiction between the processes of development and preservation orupgradation of environment may be achieved. The authors, both from the Centrefor Science and Environment which is famous for publication of the State of OurEnvironment reports, have drawn upon their data-bases and their knowledge ofvarious environmental movements/efforts in India in proposing such a design. Theirproposal appeared at a time when the Union Government was actively engaged inpushing through the ill-fated "Panchayati Raj" Amendment. The authors themselvesare conscious of this, and suggest that the envisaged political process can be help-ful in achieving their objective.

The authors start by pointing out the enormous "subsidy" that our economic systemreceives by way of inputs from various ecological processes - inputs such asfirewood, fodder and water, the determination of whose economic value is difficultand uncertain. The size of such contribution is very large: for example, almost 50%of the total energy usefully consumed in India is derived from biomass; or, themanufacture of industrial products such as paper is dependent upon the nearly ar-

98 Book Review

CED documentation is for your personal reference and study only

bitary fixation of price (lowest possible) for pulpwood. While the determination ofthe actual contribution of biomass to the economic process is difficult, one may ob-tain some idea of its size by noting that the replacement of present annual con-sumption of biomass used in cooking alone by other fuels would require 370 mil-lion tonnes of coal (current annual production is 230 million tonnes) or 70 milliontonnes of petroleum (larger than our present annual consumption of about 55 mil-lion tonnes). The problem takes on newer dimensions when one considers the fod-der requirement of 1100-1200 million heads of cattle (according to the livestock cen-sus of 1977). Based on subsistence-level norms of fuelwood and fodder require-ments, it has been estimated that by the year 2000, the country would require 300-330 million tonnes of firewood, about 780 million tonnes of green fodder and about500 million tonnes of dry fodder annually. All these are products of land whichmust also cater to the requirements of food and cash crops.

This, the authors point out, is a problem which is more serious in its impact ondevelopment than "poverty", and call for refocussing of economic growth and- ruraldevelopment programmes on "one major aim (which is) to increase biomass in anequitable and sustainable manner". Doing so is critical because the productivity onincreasingly large fraction of India's 260 million hectares used in biomass produc-tion is "very low or even declining". The authors propose that achievement of suchan objective should be an integral aspect of the "democratic decentralisation" movesaimed at "devolution of powers" to "the village communities".

The authors outline their thesis of "ecosystem-specific development", which ispremised on the argument that "ecologically sound land-use must differ from oneecosystem to another". They suggest that the planning system "must devolve downto the level of India's ecosystems (an illustrative list of 16 ecosystems is drawn up)so that a framework for ecosystem-specific development can be prepared". And theaction must take place at "the human settlement - in other words, the hamlet"while any attempt at coversion of such an approach into creation of "area develop-ment authorities" must be resisted.

The thesis is elaborated with an "action framework" which both provides substanceto the thesis and derives prescriptions. The principal argument here is that biomassdevelopment should be perceived by the village community to be an aspect of theoverall complex of "vested interests" which guarantee their own survival. The thrustshould be towards building up of an attitude whereby the community regards thecommons, vital in meeting its grazing, fuel or even water needs, as their own andtreat its preservation as an integral component of their own subsistence/survival.The present approaches of State Forest Departments or the National WastelandsDevelopment Board, involving social forestry on the commons or its "privatisation"

PPST Bulletin, Nos. 19-20, June 1990 99

(e.g. distribution to the landless families) are found inadequate in tackling the prob-lem of "alienation of the commons". The authors propose that the commons shouldbe handed over to a communitarian body, to ensure its regeneration/upkeep sothat the local needs of fodder, fuel can be met; the regenerated or preserved com-mons may also act as microwatersheds, improving catchment.

These are the material benefits and the authors bring up suggestions concerningcertain structural changes in the local institutions to ensure proper distribution ofbenefits and sustenance of the management of the eco-regeneration/preservationprocess. In this respect, the existing panchayats are found inadequate because oftheir size, mode of election of the executives, limitations due to forest and waterlaws and the exigencies of financial administration. The authors observe that thepresent day "panchayats are the products of village factionalism whereas unitywithin a community is the primary requirement for good natural resource manage-ment". Further, a panchayat often consists of more than one village (on the average"there are 29 villages per panchayat in Assam, and in Orissa and West Bengalabout 11") because of which "environmental management mediated through thepanchayat often leads to inter-settlement tensions". The failures of social forestryschemes in Maharashtra and Gujarat, mediated through village panchayats, are citedas example.

The present regulations and laws relating to forests were evolved during the Britishrule and "have totally destroyed the traditional systems of village management(with the result that) the village communities have lost all interest" in protectionand management of their land and water resources. In an effort to contain this"alienation" the "land and forest laws must become more rational both from a scien-tific and a social point of view so that we can get both people's involvement andecological regeneration". Enactment of such "enabling laws" related to land /forest orwater use will lead to a situation where "the people are encouraged to take the in-itiative to develop their natural resource-base". The authors believe that in additionto such measures, transfer of money, earmarked for rural development in the unionbudget, direct to the redefined panchayat institutions (i.e. limited to one settlementin scope, unanimity rather than majority as method in decision-making etc.) will benecessary for eco-development. The role of the government (union or state ?) maybe changed to one involving "spread of education and ecological awareness, infor-mation dissemination, training and technical assistance, appropriate research and set-ting up a national corp of scientific and ecological workers". The authors, to il-lustrate their points, cite the examples of the successes of village communities inSukhomajri (Chandigarh), Bemru (U.P.), Seed, Brahmano ka Verda (Rajasthan) inmanagement of the commons leading to augmentation of the "natural resource-base"namely, the commons. Routine doubts about the proposed scheme, such as misap-

100 Book Review

propriation of funds, overexploitation of the commons ("natural resource-base"), in-convenience to nomadic (pastoral) groups etc., are also sought to be answered bythe authors.

So, here is a strategy for linking up economic growth or subsistence with environ-mental concerns, with a new version of the village institutions acting as the link.The proposal to use the panchayat or the Grama Sabha as a vehicle in managingthe process of eco-development is indeed a novel one. But it must be pointed outthe fascination with "village institutions" which will so enthuse the villagers thatthey may offer "free labour" to carry out their programmes is well-rooted in thecolonial age. The mid-nineteenth century British administrators in the Madras (oreven Bombay) Presidency talked of "reviving" the "custom" of kudimaramath wherebythe villagers would contribute free labour to the upkeep of canals, reservoirs andwaterworks because doing so was crucial to their own survival. Of course, the par-ticipation was to be mediated by local bodies. Much later, after Independence, con-cerns about the use of panchayats, grama sabhas or similar village institutions incarrying forward the developmental process were taken seriously. In the 'fifties,Community Development Programme and the National Extension Service werelatched on to the activities of the village bodies after a high-powered committee(Balwantrai Mehta Study Team) had recommended it. About the recommendationsof this team, it is said that

they' evoked great interest and stimulated considerable thinking in the country.The country was in a receptive mood. The Community Development Move-ment had come up against the barrier of popular apathy. There was searchfor a proper and adequate solution. When Democratic Decentralisation,which has now come to be known as Panchayati Raj, was suggested as theproper answer, there was considerable emotional warmth in the acceptanceof the suggestion by the Government as well as the people. It was felt asthough a key to regenerate our stagnant and tradition-ridden rural societywas found. The country was long familiar with the idea of Panchayats[and] here was the right time to implement it. The basic apparatus of theCommunity Development was already there. It needed to be taken over bypopular bodies so that they might put more life into it.... Panchayati Raj issought to be judged in many ways. It is judged primarily as a system oflocal government and also as an instrument of Community Development. In

whatever had been the stated objectives of the Community DevelopmentProgramme, there is at least one opinion that it was aimed at bringing about a"demographic redistribution" so that instead of an "unmanagably large number"of villages, one would have a managable number of medium-sized settlements ortowns (see reference 1)

PPST Bulletin,- Nos. 19-20, June 1990 101

the context of widespread poverty and the low level of social services,Panchayati Raj without development would be a barren and sterile concept.Development is essential and vital (2).

Thus, the objective of the existence, and promotion of the Panchayati Raj institutionswas sought to be seen in its role as a carrier of the process of Development as un-derstood and enunciated on different occasions. In the present instance, Develop-ment is redefined to be regeneration of the environment.

Not only in this matter, in regards to the sizes of Panchayats too, there was somedeliberation in working out the sizes. The Rajasthan study team on Panchayati Raj(whose report was just referred to) considered this issue in detail (including elicit-ing responses on the issue by way of circulating a questionnaire) and, based uponperceptions of administrative and economic viability, access and the need to dis-courage sectarian and caste groups from "taking over", recommended a populationof 2000-2500 per panchayat (according to census 1961). About the need for unanim-ity in decision-making within the community, Jayaprakash Narayan had this to say(3):

The community can never be at war with itself: one part of it fighting theother (albeit democratically), and the majority ruling over the minority.Such kind of political battle is possible only in mass society, where there isno community The polity of Panchayati Raj, or communitarian polity,must not copy the polity of mass society.

We thus find that sentiments and strategies similar to what is said in this docu-ment have been expressed time and again, almost within a generation. The focusand the programmes differ, but the concerns are the same. It appears that this wasthe trend with the discussions and debates on the role of bodies such as thePanchayat in directing the overall movement of the polity. For example, in theMadras Presidency there have been three major attempts in 1880, 1907 and in 1946.The first attempt at creating or "revival" of local institutions of "self-governance" ap-peared to have initial success: the local bodies "grew in strength, did substantialamount of work in terms of construction and maintenance of roads, starting andmaintenance of hospitals, schools, dispensaries, etc.," But an impasse was reached inabout 20 years, with the officers of the Presidency Government insisting on exerciseof control over these bodies. The Royal Decentralisation Commission of 1907, set upto examine the administrative structure of the whole country, also gave its recom-mendations on the local bodies. Partly due to this, and due to the wide rangingdiscussion on the subject during 1909-1920 (it is said that more voluminous material

details f rom Reference (4)

102 Book Review

was published during this decade than any other time subsequently) a new enact-ment was made to give shape to local institutions but the whole thing more or lesscollapsed by 1940, with the Presidency Government assuming full authority to con-trol all activities of the Panchayat. Discussions and consultations during 1946-1958,quite similar to those that took place in 1910-1920, resulted in the enactment of thePanchayat Raj Act of 1958. This of course, took place within the framework of theconstitution which accords an insignificant status to the village bodies. By thepresent decade, what situation the panchayat bodies all over the country got into iswellknown, and this document is itself an indictment of what they are today.

We stated all this only to point out there is some continuity in the concern and ef-forts at "revival" of village bodies and their possible roles in what may be called"developmental processes". There have been repeated failures, with neither the vil-lage bodies nor the processes becoming functional. At the core seems to be theproblem that the power and authority that the village institutions could and didexercise have never been comprehended. The British designs in this respect wererather high in clarity in that the village bodies could exercise no real authority butwere to be used according to the then fashionable Western notions of "popular par-ticipation" in affairs of the state. At one time upkeep of "public works" may havebeen suggested to achieve this end and at other times, some other. Since thelocality institutions were perceived to be mechanisms to teach Indians "the art ofself-governance", they were "guided" in their activities by standing orders, manualsand GOs of various kinds. This rule of codes, procedures and norms that constitutethe rule have more or less crippled the locality institutions. For example, eventoday the reading rooms in village panchayats are regulated by instructions, setdown to the minutest detail, issued from the state secretariat. The prevalent attitudein the last forty years has been that the village institutions have no real authorityvis a vis the constituted governments, namely, the State and the Union govern-ments. Depending upon the circumstances, these bodies may be asked or "guided"into doing anything which the real rulers think important: it could be maintenanceof waterworks, or community development, or agro-technological education/exten-sion, or eco-development. The foci are different, but the attitudes remain the same.To this extent, it is our belief that this document does not offer possibilities of aconceptual departure, but generates yet another developmental scheme.

There can be no doubt that the country is facing an ecologically critical situation.Given the prospect of environmental catastrophes and the repeated and certainfailure of "panchayats" in "development", it appears that one would even wish for acentrally guided programme in this matter, rather than another round of experimen-tation with the panchayats, however redefined administratively. For example, weunderstand that the present Planning Commission has recommended merger of

PPST Bulletin, Nos. 19-20, June 1990 103

nearly a score of rural development programmes (such as IRDP, NREP, RLEGPetc.,) to have an integrated programme of action. If this could be administeredcentrally, i.e. without invoking structurally unviable local entities, but with in-genuity in administrative and finacial arrangements, the chances of success mayperhaps be better and such models might help tackle the eco-restoration problems.

In concluding this review, we must note the thouroghness in presentation andproduction that is evident in the document. It does convey the need for a sense ofurgency in tackling the critical problem of ecological disaster in our situation. Onehopes it would not be unfair to suggest to the authors to have a critical look atthe overall strategy they have propounded; perhaps a companion volume on"panchayati Raj: its genesis, failure and prospects" could be prepared!

References

1. Ashok Parthasarathi in Procthe National Workshop on Applications of High Tech.for Rural Dev. Part A Madras: Murugappa Chettiar Research Centre, 1988.

2. Report of the Study Team on Panchayati Raj Panchayat and Development Dept.,Govt. of Rajasthan, 1964.

3. Jayaprakash Narayan "Foreword" in Panchayat Raj as the Basis of Indian Polity (by)Dharampal, New Delhi: AVARD, 1962.

4. Dharampal, The Madras Panchayat System VoLII: A General Assessment Delhi,Impex India, 1972.

Oppilla Mani

104 Book Review p p

<title>Book Review - TOWARDS GREEN VILLAGES: A strategy for environmentally sound and participatory rural development</title><author>Oppilla Mani</author><keywords>SET1, Innovation Appropriate Technology</keywords><publication>PPST Bulletin</publication><pubDate>01/06/1990</pubDate><description>Ecology and environmental concerns constitute serious business today.Agitations apart, great deal of money is available or unavailable depending upon thestand one takes on these questions. Faced with criticisms of environmental insensitivityin both the biggest lender (U.S.A.) and the biggest borrower (India) countries, WorldBank has been spurred into action, injecting "environmental awareness" in its lend-ing-for-development operations through the help of hired environmental consultants and floatingproposals of "debt for nature swap" programmes aimed at protecting the forests andthus the globe.</description><entrydt>01/10/2008</entrydt><sd>AH</sd>