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 •

•••••