Poll promises of the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Congress are similar in their gross indifference to environmental issues facing the country. They see ‘development’ as being opposed to bidiversity protection. The AAP’s manifesto is relatively better
Currently, India is seeing perhaps its most exciting parliamentary election. But sorely missing in the electoral debate and manifestos is the environment. The main political parties in the fray listed some green issues such as renewable energy, water conservation, ecology, green audits, safeguarding the rights of tribals dwelling in forests, etc. But none has envisaged how these environmental objectives will be met. Especially when they stand in stark contrast to other agendas centred around economic growth, infrastructure and investments.
Manifestos are largely ritualistic exercises, but are still important as statements of intent, to facilitate rational decision-making amongst the electorate.
let's first look at the BJP manifesto, given that most opinion polls are giving this party an edge over others. The most worrying point is the promise to “frame the environment laws in a manner that provides no scope for confusion and will lead to speedy clearance of proposals without delay”. A strong legal and policy framework is crucial to protecting our fast depleting wildlife and environment. In fact, it is the most important factor in conserving forests and wildlife, and a compromise will be the death-knell. The problem is, with dilution of the legal framework, other priorities in the agenda take on ominous tones — like “ensuring an environment to make ‘doing business’ in India easy; and investment and industrial regions as global hubs of manufacturing”. Similarly, there is much emphasis on expediting freight and industrial corridors, but within a weaker a regulatory regime. One wonders whether there will be any checks and balances on the havoc this will cause to our wildlife habitats.
It’s symbolic that the BJP manifesto lists only coal, minerals and spectrum among natural resources — those which are directly marketable (have an equity market). The most critical of natural resources — land, forests, rivers, water sources and biodiversity — apparently do not count. It does mention, in passing, that it will protect the existing forests and wildlife reserves, but follows it up with a catastrophic “wastelands of the country will be used for social forestry”. To be fair, this has pretty much been the philosophy of successive Governments, largely the Congress, which has laid much emphasis on ‘greening’ deserts, and social forestry, while what is crucial is to protect existing, old growth, biodiversity, the rich forests, and preserving natural landscapes such as deserts, grassland, scrubland, wetland and other habitats that are simply ruled out as ‘wasteland’ and converted into plantation. These habitat types are rich in biodiversity and play critical roles in water purification and groundwater recharging.
Another worry is the activity planned on the border areas, for example, special emphasis on massive infrastructure development, especially along the line of Actual Control in Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim; fencing along the India-Bangladesh and India-Myanmar borders, connecting remote States like those in the North-East through world-class highways and rail lines. Border areas, by their very remoteness, are extremely rich biodiversity hotspots. No less than seven tiger reserves are on our international borders, all running into contiguous habitats across the frontiers in neighbouring countries. Wild animals treat man-made borders with disdain, transcending nations regularly. The import of such massive infrastructure or man-made barriers will destroy wilderness, devastate and fragment habitats and eventually lead to an extinction of wide-ranging animals like tigers, snow leopards and elephants.
The BJP has river-linking among its flagship schemes. Indeed, the Narmada-Kshipra river link was recently inaugurated in Madhya Pradesh with much hype and without conducting an environment impact assessment. A priority river linking project, Ken-Betwa, is expected to submerge over 100 sq km of Panna Tiger Reserve in Madhya Pradesh.
The Indian National Congress manifesto is equally disappointing, given its legacy of an exemplary environment and conservation vision — though it shouldn’t have been given their track record over the past few years. In its nine years, six lakh hectares of forests were diverted, over 2.5 lakh hectares for mining, industrial and infrastructural projects. The run-up to the elections saw the ouster of Ms Jayanthi Natarajan as Union Minister for Environment and Forests. She was perceived as being a ‘roadblock’ to growth, though going by statistics during her tenure, most of the green clearances sought were granted — at times even overruling the decisions of regulatory bodies for forests and wildlife — and others were cleared even through blatant violations of mandatory norms.
No surprises then that like the BJP, the Congress too is using as an election plank, a business-friendly governance structure, which clearly mentions that the party intends to streamline the regulatory structures and create an investment friendly environment. The idea of developing a single-window clearance mechanism for all investors is much in line with what the BJP promises. Wildlife and forests find little mention.
The most welcoming thing I find in the Aam Aadmi Party’s manifesto is that it has clubbed economy and ecology together and called for “a dynamic, equitable and ecologically sustainable economy”— even though it is weak on how this is to be achieved. At least it acknowledges that environment and economic growth are not two separate creatures. There can be no ‘economy’ without the ecology. Even the World Bank estimates that environmental degradation is costing India around 5.7 per cent of its GDP annually, thereby negating India’s ‘growth’. What is also appreciable is that the AAP is the only party to have included animal welfare in its manifesto, that too under the heading of ‘social justice’. The strengthening and enforcement of the Wildlife Protection Act and preventing the encroachment of protected forest land finds mention here.
The AAP’s agenda calls for a mechanism for decentralised governance structure and decision-making on all resource allocations, from mining to exploitation of forest resources, to harnessing potential of renewable energy. It stresses on the role of gram sabhas and/or mohalla sabhas in decision making at their respective levels and their integration in the overall governance process. The manifesto specifies “reforming the Ministry of Environment and Forests and its agencies so that they can empower and help Gram Sabhas to be effective custodians and managers of their local natural resources”. I am as wary and critical of environmental governance (or its absence) and the worrying perception of MoEF’s role as a ‘clearance facilitator’ instead of that of an environment protector, but I would be cautious of handing over management and control of natural resources to the gram sabhas, particularly given that demands on natural resources, including minor forest produce, have increased exponentially. The market for natural resources, including minor forest produce, particularly from crucial wildlife habitats, cannot be governed by a laissez faire system.
We need a more democratic model of governance that will work with local communities and ensure that they are the first beneficiaries of conservation and natural resources. Gram sabhas and local communities must play a decisive role when their lands and natural resources are being acquired, or in projects that impacts their livelihoods. Equally, important wildlife habitats and Protected Areas must be inviolate; protection and conservation of wildlife with an iron fist must take priority.