Prof. M.Ravichandran

Environmental Challenges of India

A MACRO LEVEL OUTLOOK

Planet Earth exists since 4.5 Billion Years.

Life on Earth started since last 2 Billion Years.

Human beings (homo sapiens) came in to existence since last 2 Million years.

Civilization began since last 5000 years.

Modern Science has been there since last 750 years.

Basic Environmental Facts

1) Forest cover is just 11 per cent

against the desirable 33 per cent according to the National

Forest Policy.

2) India is one of the mega centres of biodiversity in the world.

3) About 16 rivers in the world

experience severe erosion: of

these Ganges stands 2nd and Bramaputra 3rd

5) 10 per cent of Rural & urban

population does not have access

to regular safe drinking water.

4) Population growth will lead to decline in per capita availability of

fresh water-

1947---------5150 cubic meter

2000 --------2200 cubic meter

2017 ------- 1600 cubic meter

6) 1 crore suffer due to excess arsenic in water.

7) 7 crore people in 20 states are at risk due to excess fluoride.

8) Air pollution load from transport

sector was 0.15 million tonnes in

1947, which increased to 10.3 million tonnes in 1997.

10) Pollution load from Industrial

sector was 0.2 million tonnes in

1947, 3 million tonnes in 1997.

9) The organic content of the soil at present is 0.2 per cent, while it was 3 to 3.5 per cent before green revolution.

11) At present, 1.2 billion people world wide defecate in the open and India has the uncomfortable distinction of leading the list with 665 million (2006).

12) A study conducted by the Centre for Science and Environment revealed that the GDP in India has gone up by two and a half times during 1975-95, while industrial air pollution has gone up by four times.

13) World Bank estimates the total cost

of Environmental damage in India amounts to U.S $ 9.7

billion

annually or 4.5 per cent of the GDP.

Environmental Challenges

1.Industrial pollution2.Acid rain3.Noise pollution4.Indoor pollution5.Agricultural pollution6.Dioxin toxicity7.Deep sea mining8.Grain drain9.Green energy10.Lost woods

11.Asia brown cloud12.Domestically prohibited goods.13.Solid waste disposal14.Pesticide residues in soft drinks15.Contamination of drinking water16.Global Warming-Climate Change17.Linking of rivers18. Damage by detergents19. Slaughter house problem

20. Loss of Biodiversity21. GMO 22. Mad cow Disease23. Eco-Sanitation24. Loss of Common Property

Resources(CPRs)25. E-waste26. Bio-Fuel and Food Security

Environmental Issues

1. Poverty and environment2. Population pressure and environment3. Access to natural resources4. Sustainable development5. Internal and external threats 6. Urban environmental problems 7. Rural environmental problems8. Global problems

GRAIN DRAIN

Fine cereals like rice and wheat are given priority leading to over production. These crops are water intensive, less nutritious and require more inputs for cultivation.

On the other hand, coarse grains like jowar (sorghum), millets like bajra (pearl millet), ragi (finger millet), kutki (little millet), kodo (kodo millet), cheena (proso millet), kangani (foxtail millet), pseudocereals like amaranthus, buckwheat, jave (barley),jau (oats) and maize are nutritionally rich, have their own speciality like pest resistance, drought resistance and early maturity.

Projections show that India is the only country with negative growth in coarse grain production.

Public Distribution is also responsible for the sorry state of affairs.

Global production of coarse grains and Global production of coarse grains and projections show that India would be the only projections show that India would be the only

coarse grain producing country with a coarse grain producing country with a

negative rate of growthnegative rate of growth

21.73.61.93.42.2

22.1-0.4

2.7

3.21.52

459.36290.2641.17102.3324.57229.56

404.77127.7629.456.6693.6578.321314.35

426.38273.4431.1192.5319.6220.647

375.12119.0829.446.1286.1373.21200.1

3

401.11262.6627.3585.7116.46184.89

347.81110.5929.765.5478.5768.18933.81

Developed countriesUSACanadaEEC-10Rest of EuropeEast Europe & Russian lederation

Developing CountriesChinaIndiaThailand America (Mexico and south)East AfricaWorld

1989-052005*20001995

Average growth rate (%)

Production (million tonnes)Countries

.

Coarse grains contribute food for 40% of the country’s population and two-thirds of the livestock population.

Increase in diabetes, heart diseases and hypertension can be taken as the manifestation of the replacement of traditional food with food based on rice and wheat.

The poor varieties of rice and wheat grown in our country contain mostly starch and very few vitamins and minerals; they are also deficient in vitamin A and iron.

Our government is blindly inducing all people to eat these deficient food items by supplying it through PDS, as a result the problem of deficiency of micronutrients like iron, zinc, iodine and vitamins among the poor is on the increase.

M.S.Swaminathan says “ Nutritional security is in very bad shape in our country. Every third child is under weight. There are two types of hunger in our country. You can see open hunger, but hidden hunger, which is due to micronutrient deficiency, is not visible from outside. Both are serious in our country.”

The best option is to diversify part of lands under fine grain cultivation to grow coarse grains. Coarse grains make good environment and social sense, provide cheap alternatives for regional food security and adequate nutrition to the poorest of poor.

Loss of Access to Common Property Resources : (CPRs)

Resources accessible to and collectively owned/held/managed by an identifiable community and on which no individual has exclusive property rights are called Common Property Resources (NSSO, 2000).

Extent and Decline of Area of CPR land in Dry RegionsExtent and Decline of Area of CPR land in Dry Regions

1971 (No.)

1951 (No.)

286101504127Tamil Nadu (2)

501355184911Rajasthan (3)

88403191813Maharashtra (3)

471441143514Madhya pradesh (3)

1174640116512Karnataka (4)

238824458715Gujarat (3)

134484282710Andhra Pradesh (3)

Persons per 10 ha of CPR

Decline in the area of CPRs since 1950-52 (%)

Area of CPRs 1982 –84 (ha)

No. of studyVillages

State (and no. of districts)

17. State owned irrigation water supplies

18. Drinking water

19. Ground water

20. Barren and uncultivable land

21. Cultivable waste

22. Land under miscellaneous tree crops and groves

23. Other then current fallow

24. Drainage canals

25. Channel

26. Cart path

27. Foot path

28. Nattham

29. Anathinam

30. Road and road sides

31. Non tax govt. land

32. Rack/Quarry

1. Community forests

2. Common grazing grounds

3. Tanks and tank beds

4. Tank foreshores

5. Threshing grounds

6. River and river beds

7. Rivulets

8. Waste lands (wet & dry)

9. Waste dumping places

10. Waste drainage

11. Village ponds

12. Burial and burning ground

13. Common drinking water well

14. Urani

15. Small pites

16. Railway lines both sides

•Generally Common Property Resources [CPRs] includeGenerally Common Property Resources [CPRs] include

Population Pressure (Human & Livestock)Land reformsEconomic DevelopmentState Intervention, Commercialization of the CommonsPrivatization of the CommonsGlobalization of the CommonsLiberalization of the Commons Technological ChangePovertyEnvironmental Stress Property RightsAnti – Poverty Programmes and Illegal encroachments

Causes of CPRs Degradation

DOMESTICALLY PROHIBITED GOODS (DPG)

Dangerous products undesired at home are called Domestically Prohibited Goods (DPG). In international parlance, DGPs are defined as products that are either banned or severely restricted for sale in the country of origin but are allowed to be exported to other countries.

Products notified as DGPs include:

Chemicals such as highly toxicliquids, benzene, chlorides, PCTsand asbestos.Pharmaceuticals for human and animal use.Fertilizers, pesticides and other plant protection products.Substances used in food and food-stuffs such as additives.Cleansing agents.Cosmetics and perfumery.Dangerous substances used in toys and car accessories.Dangerous products like auto-ignition candles, certain toy planes etc.Gunpowder, explosives and military equipment.Radioactive substances.Poisonous and deleterious substances.

Developed countries follow double standards; they allow export of DGPs to developing countries but prohibit import of the same from these countries on the ground that they may contain toxic substances

Import of Mercury

India being the largest importer of Mercury, its consumption has increased five-fold over a period of seven years, from 346 tonnes in 1997-98 to 1386 tonnes un 2002-2003.Methylmercury is neurotoxic.Exposure to it causes health hazards like irritation, speech and visual impairment, kidney failure and Alazheimer’s disease.

Many examples can be cited to point out the irrational dumping of DGPs by the industrialized nations into the poor countries. Toxic wastes, hazardous chemicals, obsolete technologies, are being donated, exported or dumped into developing countries, which are desperate to develop at any cost.

The Rich are guided by the Not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) syndrome, while the poor by the Welcome-in-my –backyard (WIMBY) syndrome. However the poor will choose poison over starvation, because of the impact of poison is slow and less cruel.

The Basel convention

The Basel convention on the control of trans- boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted in March 1989 and came into force on the 5th May 1999.

Loss of BiodiversityLoss of BiodiversityThe concept of biodiversity is quite The concept of biodiversity is quite wider in terms of its constituents as it wider in terms of its constituents as it covers all the living components of covers all the living components of the extensive ecosystem from the the extensive ecosystem from the ancient flora and fauna to the recent ancient flora and fauna to the recent crops and livestock.crops and livestock.

In simple terms the realm of In simple terms the realm of biodiversity comprises plants, biodiversity comprises plants, animals and micro – organisms. animals and micro – organisms.

Basically these are resources both biological and genetic in forms found mostly in the tropical forests.

‘Insitu’ and ‘Exsitu’ that is in terms of bio and genetic forms in the wild, before being manipulated and developed and kept in laboratories for further genetic manipulation.

In situ resources

17%

83%

North South

Natural Division

Forest

Savannah

Mammals

Birds

Reptiles amphibians

Fish

Plants

The developing countries are rich in natural resources

Cultural wisdom

Indigenous

Farmers

Livestock

Crop

Native knowledge lies in mainly in the Southern countries

In situ technology

16%

84%

North South

You sow and we reap

Plant references

Seed Banks

Gardens

Microbial

Biomass

Plant specimens

Seed accessions

Seed Bank species

Zoo/aqua species

Microbial collect

Fungi collect

Resources are of the South but profits and with the North

Ex situ resources

71%

29%

North South

No fair share

Ecologist

Agronomists

Plant tissue culture

Agricultural R&D

biotech

Micro pat

South is way behind in modern technology

Ex situ technology

83%

17%

North South

Essentially the debate boils down to the question of Economics. Only the economic benefits over the use of biodiversity cause much concern for the North and South.

Another facet of Biodiversity Convention is Sociology, quite significant from the point of actual forest dwellers who co-exist with biodiversity.

The North calls these resources The North calls these resources as global heritage, seems very as global heritage, seems very magnanimous as for as bio and magnanimous as for as bio and genetic resources are concerned.genetic resources are concerned.

Until 1992, the Northern Until 1992, the Northern developed nations had gained developed nations had gained accessibility almost freely to the accessibility almost freely to the biological resources across the biological resources across the world.world.

This needs to be addressed in the backdrop of globalization process, which is an inevitable mechanism in vogue. The socio-politico-economic implications of releasing such crops into the environment need to be assessed critically.

When Biodiversity Conventions was placed in the Earth Summit, for signature, almost 156 member countries had signed barring a few. Most conspicuous exception is the United States of America.

Genetically Modified (GM)

Genetically – engineered crops are those which contain a foreign gene. Geneticists today can cut out a gene from anywhere, not necessarily plant and put it into any crop.

These way traits that are not present in the particular crop can be brought in from anywhere: another plant, an animal or even a bacterium.

Genetic Engineering

Species

A B C

Cell Cell

Nucleus Nucleus

Chromosome DNA DNA

(Deoxyribonucleic acid) Gene(s) Gene

Germplasm Germplasm New species

BIOTECHNOLOGY

Genetically Modified Food Are genetically modified organisms (GMO) a panacea for solving the world’s hunger problem or a potential threat to environment in general and human health in particular? This is a tough but a formidable question for discussion.

GMOs- DisbenefitsGene escape into the environment causing growth of super weeds.

Destruction of useful insects along with the pests harmful to the crops.

Transgenic crops, which have better growth, might compete with desirable crops leading to their loss.

Unexpected and undesirable change in the ecology of that region.

Experimental errors – cloning wrong genes into the organism.

Insertion of a desired gene sequence may (cause) take place at an undesirable site in the host genome.

– Andhra Pradesh, the state where more than 500 farmers committed suicide after a failed crop in 1998.

– A packet of One kg of Bt cotton is sold at Rs.3000 per kg. This amount is excessively high when compared to the price of the conventional seed which is sold at Rs.500 per kg.

– According to GEAC rules, a refuge belt- comprising one-fifth of every field - has to be se up where planting of non- Bt varieties will be mandatory.

BAMBOO

British Rulers of India, saw bamboo as a rich exploitable resource and declared it as a tree for their own benefit, thereby preventing access to the locals.

Carl von Linne, Swedish botanist and ‘Father of Taxonomy’ classifies bamboo as a grass.

• Indian Forest Act, 1927, declared bamboo as a tree.

• Modern taxonomy classifies bamboo as a giant graminoid or grass belonging to the family Poaceae.

• If regarded as tree- major forest resource- denial of access to forest dwellers.

• If regarded as grass- minor forest resource- natives of forest have right to access.

Carl Von Linne, the father of modern taxonomy and modern ecology, argued in favour of bamboo as a giant graminoid (grass).

Forest Rights Act, 2006, FRA was passed in the Indian parliament on 13, December 2006.

This act has unfolded the prejudices against the tribal people.

Government has monopoly to harvest, use and sell bamboo.

Annual trade of bamboo in India is Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 15,000 crore.

Forms the major raw material for pulp and paper industry and construction industry.

Locals use bamboo for subsistence- part of their livelihood.

Forest departments proclaim cutting and transporting of bamboo illegal, if done by locals.

Transit passes and permission to use bamboo denied to the people who solely depend on them for existence.

India, second richest country in bamboo resources.

136 species of bamboo in India

9.57 million hectare of bamboo forest

Annual production of 4.7 million tonnes.

Forest communities have nurtured and protected bamboo for centuries.

Traditionally they use bamboo for construction of bridges, houses, fences weapons etc.

It is used as food- tender bamboo shoots serve as food.

Every day utility items like utensils, baskets, fans, mats and crafts are produced for trade.

Government should proclaim bamboo as a grass and thereby it becomes a minor forest produce and the locals would have free access.

Reluctance of State Governments to forgo the revenue creates delay in implementation of the amendment in the Forest Act.

Stakeholders partnership with easy accessibility would conserve the bamboo forest and prevent degradation.

Moreover bamboos are the most eco-friendly material that can combat global warming

Bamboos sequestrates C02 at a higher rate than any other tree.

It reduces energy use in construction.

Durable, bio-degradable and non- toxic

High resilience and earth quake proof.

Holistic green energy solution

SUSTAINABLE USAGE – only way to maintain green growth in the years to come.

Mining Industry and Environment

India has huge mineral deposits.

Mineral production in 1993-1994 was of value Rs. 25,000 crore.

In 2005-2006 it has become Rs. 84,000 crore (more than 70 per cent increase).

India’s Rank in Global Mining Industry

Commodity Contribution in percentage

Rank in order of quantum production

Mineral Fuels

Coal and lignite 7.65 3

Petroleum 0.93 26

Metallic Minerals

Bauxite 7.04 6

Chromite 17.71 2

Iron Ore 9.92 4

Manganese Ore 7.30 8

Industrial Minerals

Barites 11.47 2

Kyanite, andalusite, silimanite

5.0 4

Magnesite 1.55 9

Apatite and rock phospate

1.02 14

Talc/ steatite/pyrophylite 10.37 3

Mica 1.42 8

State-wise Lease for Major Minerals

State Number of leases Lease area (hectares)

Andhra Pradesh 1482 47,905

Chattisgarh 259 30,353

Goa 396 30,325

Gujarat 1,589 37,457

Haryana 148 16,890

Jharkhand 384 45,185

Karnataka 514 50,902

Madhya Pradesh 1,154 33,465

Maharashtra 220 15,988

Orissa 629 95,532

Rajasthan 1,312 134,832

536 31,667

Impacts of Mining

Forest clearance

Displacement of people

Loss of livelihood

Loss of biodiversity

Water scarcity

Creation of fallow lands

Health hazards

Mineral wealth of our country sold at low cost to outsiders

Landslide, earthquakes, famine

Mining and seismic activity

Mining leaves huge void in earth’s surface- this alters the balance of forces on rocks.

Ground collapses in mining areas and produce seismic waves.

Mining may reactivate the existing faults in earth and cause quakes.

POSCO

Pohang Iron and Steel Company, (POSCO) Korea-

US $ 12 billion POSCO project covering 1620 hectare of which 1440 hectare is forest land in the state of Odisha.

The project envisages a steel plant, power plant and port. It also requires construction of 300 kms of railway track for transport of ore from mines to factory through forest area.

Additional 2469 hectares of hilly area in Khandadhar to be brought under mining.

This major project is for economic development- according to the Odisha government.

Locals fight against the project since conception.

Are they against development?

According to Government the project will displace only 466 families, about 2,500 people who will be adequately compensated.

But the forest area is the livelihood for more than 10,000 to 15,000 people.

The forest of Sundergarh is home to Mundas, Oraons, Paudi- Bhuiyan tribes.

Their livelihood is betel cultivation in the forest land and other minor forest produce.

Forest Rights Act demands consent from these people before initiation of the project.

The State government says these people are not entitled to this right as they are not traditional forest dwelling community.

Compensation of Rs. 28.75 lakhs per hectare of acquired land is being offered.

Betel farming provides Rs. 10- 17.5 lakhs per hectare per year.

The compensation will be equal to 2-3 years of revenue.

POSCO cannot employ locals as they are not skilled labors.

POSCO may be development but will be development that takes the livelihood of the people for whom the project is meant for.

It is a tussle between land based economic growth as against industrial growth.

POSCO is about GROWTH versus GROWTH.

References

1. Down To Earth, Science and Environment Fortnightly, March 31,

2007, p 63.

2. The Hindu, April 9, 2007, Daphne

Wysham and Smith Kothari, ‘Climate

change will devastate India’ p11.

3. Leela Raina, TERRAGREEN, Teri, volume

1, Issue 8, November 2008.

4. Citizen's Report, State of India's

Environment, 1991 to 2005, CSE, Delh.

5. Nidhi Janwal, ‘e-waste Developing countries 5. Nidhi Janwal, ‘e-waste Developing countries

are dumpyards for new millennium trash’, Down are dumpyards for new millennium trash’, Down to to

Earth, Science and Environment Fornightly, Vol Earth, Science and Environment Fornightly, Vol 12, No 12, No

12, November 15, 2003, p 50-51.12, November 15, 2003, p 50-51. 6. Deepa Kozhisseri, ‘E- waste in real space’, Down 6. Deepa Kozhisseri, ‘E- waste in real space’, Down

to to

Earth, Science and Environment Fornightly, Vol Earth, Science and Environment Fornightly, Vol 13,No 13,No

21, March 31, 2005,p 42-43.21, March 31, 2005,p 42-43.

THANK YOU

Dr.M.Ravichandran Professor & Head Department of Environmental

Management Bharathidasan University Tiruchirappalli-620 024

Mobile: 98425 25728 e.mail:

muruguravi@yahoo.co.in