Natural resources in India are pertinent to the growth and success of the people and economy. India is abundant with natural resources ranging from forests, mangroves, lignite, iron ore, and bodies of water that supports the fishing industry. The potential for exploitation of such resources was recognized early on particularly by the British in the 1700s when they expanded their territory into India. It was in the 1800s that the fight for local resources broke out between the local people and the British. This time exemplifies the struggle that still continues between communal and private ownership of resources. Through various lectures, site visits, and personal observations I have seen the importance and the struggle involved in conserving and sustainably using India’s forest resources and how this is connected with the ownership of such resources.
Forests currently occupy 20% of the land in India; however, this amount is rapidly decreasing as forests are being exploited by various corporations or by local people that have no other option but to cut down trees for income. Technically forests are a renewable resource because they can be re-grown; however, forests do not grow in a human life time and are therefore in essence a non-renewable resource. As a non-renewable resource it is important to focus on how best to conserve these resources. The issue with conservation is that there are competing interests including political, local, and environmental interests. All of these interests are constantly in a struggle to utilize remaining forest resources for their own good and success. Often time social aspects are ignored in such debates when in reality social aspects should be the main consideration in determining how forests are to best be used.
Dr. Ajit Menon spoke to us at Madras Christian College and spoke on the topic of “Forests, Common, and Agrarian Societies in India.” His lecture touched on the importance of forests and how the idea of the common influences the conservation of, or lack thereof, forests. Forests are particularly important to rural areas because they provide fuel, income, and other sources of livelihood for the people in rural areas. In fact, 20-25% of rural income comes from forests and thus, the livelihood of these people is threatened by the continual degradation of the forests. The question that is debated regarding management of forests is whether any one person or corporation can actually “own” a forest or is a forest a common good where nobody owns it and nobody can be excluded from its use. The idea of common goods brings up important questions of political versus social aspects in the management of environmental resources.
Competing political and societal needs are often solved through power struggles between corporations, political parties, and industries. One solution to this problem that I have observed is exemplified in the Neyveli Lignite Mine Corporation. This mine is a government owned corporation and has been able to stay out of political struggles and at the same time is able to contribute to society, taking social problems into consideration in its operation. The mine limits the amount of land degradation through various land reclamation projects that turns degraded land into green areas or water bodies. The corporation also provides water and power to nearby villages and townships. Many times local needs of villagers, such as income and power, are neglected for the benefit of corporations. Therefore, it was good to see one way in which the government can step in and make it so that both the corporation and the villagers’ needs are met. The picture below is one example of a reclamation project where the corporation converted the land into a lake.
Many people think of forest management has solely a science/environmental issues; in reality preserving the environment and figuring out the best way to do so is very much a social issue. Forests have been considered a community resource for hundreds of years and only recently governments and corporations came in and “bought” the forests and torn them down. While this is one negative aspect of taking away the “commons” idea of natural resources, the opposite can have a negative effect as well. Water resources are a good example of how a natural resource being viewed as a common can actually have a negative effect on the environment and conservation of resources. If water is seen as a common then nobody takes any responsibility for the pollution of the waters and nobody takes the initiative to try and reverse the pollution. This is not just a matter of better management of resources being needed but it is a social issue where the problem is that people do not have alternatives.
Government and organizations need to look into why people are polluting the waters in the first place so that they can fix that problem rather than say the resources need to be public or private property. In the same way, other resources such as forests have to be viewed in a social way in which the problem is how to best conserve these resources that supports the local population but also allows corporations and governments to use the resources in a way that may benefit society on a larger scale.
Forests currently occupy 20% of the land in India; however, this amount is rapidly decreasing as forests are being exploited by various corporations or by local people that have no other option but to cut down trees for income. Technically forests are a renewable resource because they can be re-grown; however, forests do not grow in a human life time and are therefore in essence a non-renewable resource. As a non-renewable resource it is important to focus on how best to conserve these resources. The issue with conservation is that there are competing interests including political, local, and environmental interests. All of these interests are constantly in a struggle to utilize remaining forest resources for their own good and success. Often time social aspects are ignored in such debates when in reality social aspects should be the main consideration in determining how forests are to best be used.
Dr. Ajit Menon spoke to us at Madras Christian College and spoke on the topic of “Forests, Common, and Agrarian Societies in India.” His lecture touched on the importance of forests and how the idea of the common influences the conservation of, or lack thereof, forests. Forests are particularly important to rural areas because they provide fuel, income, and other sources of livelihood for the people in rural areas. In fact, 20-25% of rural income comes from forests and thus, the livelihood of these people is threatened by the continual degradation of the forests. The question that is debated regarding management of forests is whether any one person or corporation can actually “own” a forest or is a forest a common good where nobody owns it and nobody can be excluded from its use. The idea of common goods brings up important questions of political versus social aspects in the management of environmental resources.
Competing political and societal needs are often solved through power struggles between corporations, political parties, and industries. One solution to this problem that I have observed is exemplified in the Neyveli Lignite Mine Corporation. This mine is a government owned corporation and has been able to stay out of political struggles and at the same time is able to contribute to society, taking social problems into consideration in its operation. The mine limits the amount of land degradation through various land reclamation projects that turns degraded land into green areas or water bodies. The corporation also provides water and power to nearby villages and townships. Many times local needs of villagers, such as income and power, are neglected for the benefit of corporations. Therefore, it was good to see one way in which the government can step in and make it so that both the corporation and the villagers’ needs are met. The picture below is one example of a reclamation project where the corporation converted the land into a lake.
Reclaimed land at the Neyveli Mine
Placing forests under the control of the government is one potential idea that would help slow the degradation of forests while at the same time spreading the use of the forest resources over a wider population. The only problem with this is that corruption has the potential to cause major problems. Corruption could lead to mismanage of resources, especially during party change in the government or if the party is “bought out” by a large corporation. With ever pressing energy issues, forests and other natural resources are also coming under intense pressures on a global scale. On a worldwide level such resources are being investigated for the use of biofuels. This brings up the question of the importance of local versus national and international needs. There has to be a balance of meeting the needs of the nation and world without compromising the needs of the local people.
Placing forests under the control of the government is one potential idea that would help slow the degradation of forests while at the same time spreading the use of the forest resources over a wider population. The only problem with this is that corruption has the potential to cause major problems. Corruption could lead to mismanage of resources, especially during party change in the government or if the party is “bought out” by a large corporation. With ever pressing energy issues, forests and other natural resources are also coming under intense pressures on a global scale. On a worldwide level such resources are being investigated for the use of biofuels. This brings up the question of the importance of local versus national and international needs. There has to be a balance of meeting the needs of the nation and world without compromising the needs of the local people.
Many people think of forest management has solely a science/environmental issues; in reality preserving the environment and figuring out the best way to do so is very much a social issue. Forests have been considered a community resource for hundreds of years and only recently governments and corporations came in and “bought” the forests and torn them down. While this is one negative aspect of taking away the “commons” idea of natural resources, the opposite can have a negative effect as well. Water resources are a good example of how a natural resource being viewed as a common can actually have a negative effect on the environment and conservation of resources. If water is seen as a common then nobody takes any responsibility for the pollution of the waters and nobody takes the initiative to try and reverse the pollution. This is not just a matter of better management of resources being needed but it is a social issue where the problem is that people do not have alternatives.
Government and organizations need to look into why people are polluting the waters in the first place so that they can fix that problem rather than say the resources need to be public or private property. In the same way, other resources such as forests have to be viewed in a social way in which the problem is how to best conserve these resources that supports the local population but also allows corporations and governments to use the resources in a way that may benefit society on a larger scale.
