4409317

8/3/2019 4409317

1/5

State of the Environment in Kerala: What Price the Development Model?Author(s): Ramakrishnan KorakandySource: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 35, No. 21/22 (May 27 - Jun. 2, 2000), pp. 1801-1804Published by: Economic and Political WeeklyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4409317 .

Accessed: 18/10/2011 04:31

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Economic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

8/3/2019 4409317

2/5

S t a t e o f t h e Environmenti n Kera laWhatPrice the DevelopmentModel?The Keralagovernment s throwingthe state's natural resourcesopento exploitationby the agents of globalisation, ignoringthepeople's demandfortheprotectionof the environment nd themaintenanceof sustainability.It is time or the state to thinkafreshaboutecology in the light of the celebratedKerala modelofdevelopment.RAMAKRISHNANKORAKANDY

erala has achieved remarkableprogress in the fields of health,iteracy, housing, etc, and earnedworldwide praise for the quality of life ofits people. It is now considered a modelfor people in other parts of the world tofollow. The pattern of developmentachieved by Kerala has been christenedthe 'Kerala model' of development incertainacademiccircles. Kerala's achieve-ments have been attributed o progressivepolicies adopted by successive stategovernments.The state is now poised for a quantumleap in its accomplishments with greaterinvolvement of the common peoplethroughwhat is now called as thepeople'scampaign for the ninth plan. It has iden-tified sectors like tourism, aquaculture,power production and software produc-tion as priorityareas for people's partici-pation. Chief minister E K Nayanar hasdeclaredthe state an 'Internetvalley', trueto the spirit of globalisation.Keralahaslong beendescribedas 'god'sown country' in tourism circles. AnAmerican (a woman) participating in aseminar on tourism in Cochin describedKerala as the 'world's closely guardedsecret'.Thatshouldnotsurprise hepeopleof Kerala who rarelyreveal their worth toothers. But it is good news forthe seminar-hungryand for new-world academics andpolicy-mongers.However, one is disconcerted when onelooks at the environment of Kerala's

forests, rivers and coastal belt. The man-agementof these resourcesfollows neitherthe principles of sustainability nor thoseof transparencyand accountability.Recognition of these omissions in themanagement of the economy of the mostliteratestate, a 'progressive' one, calls for

no erudite scholarship in economics. Anhonest and impartial look at the contem-porary economic and social scene willmake the default clear. While assessingthe stateof the environment in Kerala,oneshould keep in mind the basic conceptsof natural resource conservation, self-management and sustainability.Basic Concepts'Conservation' aims at the sustained useof naturalresources throughthe preserva-tion or propagation of animal and plantbreeding stock and such manipulation ofthe current use of the other exhaustiblenatural resources as would make themavailable for use in the futureas well. Themanipulation could take the form of ra-tioning orrecycling either of which wouldcontrol consumption.'Self-management' is a modern man-agement tool which envisages people'sparticipation in the management process- in the making and implementation ofdecisions and the sharing of benefits. Itprobablyoriginated nabelatedrealisationthat only decentralised, participatorymanagement could bring about the trans-formation hatany management,especiallycommunity development management, isexpected to achieve. Itis claimed thatonlyself-management or management bypeople's councils at the grass roots levelcan reflect community needs and aspira-tions and spur changes in social-goal-oriented action programmes. It is alsoranked among the least-cost methods ofplanning.The greatest appealof self-managementis that it is democratic, decentralised andtransparentnitsworking.Thedemocratic,principle of accountability is seen as oneof its attributes. The decision-makers areresponsible for the decisions they take,their mplementationand theresults,while

they are themselves the beneficiaries oftheir actions.'Sustainability' is a criterion of naturalresource management or economic devel-opment which aims at ensuring the con-tinued use of resources now and in thefuture. As Asheim puts it sustainabledevelopment is "a requirement to ourgeneration to manage the resource basesuch that the average quality of life weensureourselves can potentially be sharedby all futuregenerations" [Asheim 1991].It has been characterisedas 'non-declin-

ing consumption over time' and as 'non-declining utility', the concept of utilityincluding the non-material values includ-ing, the satisfaction derived from thenaturalenvironment, andaesthetic values.The former concept is a pure economicquantity, the promotion of which, how-ever, affects the latterone: economic valueis added only througha continuous trans-formation of ecological resources.Sustainable development requires pre-vention of the fall in the natural capitalstock below the safe minimum standard(SMS) identified for each component ofthe stock. Here the role of conservationis explicit. Sustainable development in-volves the achievement of equity bothwithin each generation (intra-generationalequity) and across generations (inter-gen-erational equity). Equity is demanded onethical rather than on efficiency grounds[Hanley et al 1997: 425].Crisis Areas

How is Kerala managing the environ-ment of itsforests, riversand coastalzones?These areas arebeing focused on becausethey are the majorareasof public concern,areas in which, in recent times environ-mental-economic crises have led to socialones with political overtones. A scrutinyof these areasmay be made from thepointof view of conservation, self-managementand sustainability.Forest Front

The crisis in the forest environment ismanifest in the dwindling forest cover ofthe state. The total forest area of the statehas come down from 11,241.97 hectaresin 1994 to 11,236.06 ha in 1996. Theforest cover in the Periyarcatchment areaalone is reported o have dwindled by two-thirdsover the last 100 years [TheHindu,7.5.98]. Deforestation and encroachmentby ettlers are the obvious reasons for thisdevelopment.This has been alluded to in the Eco-nomic Review of Kerala, 1994. The re-view noted that "the dichotomy betweenthe area classified as forests as per land

Economic and Political Weekly May 27, 2000 1801

8/3/2019 4409317

3/5

recordsand the actual forest cover hadalwaysbeenamatter f controversynthepast"[StatePlanningBoard 1994: 66].Thissimply ndicateswhathasbeenhap-pening otheforestareasoriginallynotedas such and what is left of them now.It also indicatesgovernmentacquies-cence in the ongoing rapeof the forestsby settlersandothers.Here,the goal ofconservation asbeen hrowno the windsas it is foundpoliticallyunfeasible.Per-hapsthe government'sapproach o thistask s designed o suit the 'social valuesand economic interests of those whocontend for political dominancein thestatelegislatures' Heikeoff 1980: 1].Large-scale llegal felling of trees byprivate stateownersandothers s a criti-cal issue which newspapersn the statehavereported mpteen imes. TheHinduof November5, 1996 reported hat "arecentprobeby thevigilancewingof theKerala orestdepartment ad confirmedreports bout arge-scaleunlawful ellingof trees in Nelliampathy ills".Quotingthevigilancewing's report,t said"Manyestatesare notbeing managedprofitably.Their mainsourceof incomeappears obe fellingof trees."The paperfurtherreported hat therewere nstances f estateownersobtainingpermissionortree-felling romthegov-ernment r the courtsafterthe divisionalforest officers or rangeofficers had re-jectedtheirapplications. Duringhepastfew years variousestate owners in theNelliampathy rea had obtainedgovern-ment rders or elling rees. na fewcases,permissiono fell trees has beengrantedbasedon directionsof court".It is also reportedhat trees are felledin leased-out states when the leases areabout oexpire.Large-scale estructionfforestsandtrees is reported o have re-sulted n soil erosion,changein climatepatterns,movements of wild animals,leadingo ncreasingonflictbetweenmanandanimals, nddisappearancefrare ndendangeredlora and fauna.TheHindu urther oted hat hedestruc-tion of the forest and tree cover inNelliampathyills hadresultednagrow-ing incidence of poachingin the area.Ground-clearingorplantations ad ed tothe destruction f rare and endangeredorchidspecies.Acquiescencen the illegal occupationanddestructionf the orestareaby greedysettlersandestateowners s evident n thegovernment'sregularlyvesting holdingrights nthe settlersonce sufficientpoliti-calpressures exertedbythe settler arm-ers'lobby.Thatsuchwastheapproachothe governanceof vested landsbecame

apparentn 1996,when thestategovern-mentwanted oobtain hepresident'sssenttotheverycontroversial erala cheduledTribes(Restriction n Transfer f Landsand Restoration of Alienated Lands)Amendment ill.Thegovernmententanall-party elegationo New Delhi topressforpresidentialatificationfthebill,whichin factsoughto egalise hesettlers' laimsto tribalpeople'sencroached ndusurpedlands.OnerecallsShakespear'somment:What hall he have thatkilledthe deer?His leatherskin and hornsto wear,Thensing him home?Take thouno scorn to wear the horn?Though he president's ssent was notforthcoming,hegovernments still afterit. The fundamentalquestion here iswhether uchactsembellish heimageofthe 'mostprogressive'tateor'god'sowncountry'and whether heyfulfil the con-ditions fsustainability,elf-management,conservation,tc, upheldbypostmodern,post-communist, eformist, one world'humanity.Whatonefinds nthehomesteads f hillpeople n Kerala s totallyat variancewithwhatonehearsaboutprotectiono indig-enouscommunities,ultures, tc,at inter-national eminarsandmeetings.The in-telligentsiamight uggestmore tudies nddemandmorefunds for them.RiverSceneThe situation elatingo Kerala's iversis attended yamultitude fproblems,hemostdamagingbeingpollution, edimen-tation,sand miningand constrictionofriver lows. A V Thamarakshan,hairmanof thelegislativeassemblycommitteeonenvironment, as said "Theriversystemsare in real dangerof being irrevocablypolluteddueto heavydischarge f indus-trial effluents and other factors"[TheHindu, 17.6.1998].Quotingroma recent urvey f 12majorriversof the state,including he Periyar,theBharathapuzha,hePamba,heChaliyarandtheValapattanam,e notedthepres-ence of high evelsof coliformbacteria nmost of the rivers.The problemwas re-portedto be most serious in the Pambawithpilgrims ausingmostof thedamage.Ithasalsobeenobserved hatatendencyto dumpgarbageand animalwastesfromslaughterhousesndto discharge ewagewaterdirectly ntoriverswas growingatanalarming ate n thestate.A June1998incident f large-scale eathsof fish in thePeriyarnear Eloor impelledthe state'spollutioncontrolboard o servea show-cause noticeon FACT,a leadingpublic-sectorundertaking.heundertakinglleg-edly releaseduntreatedffluents ntothe

river thusbringingabout the fish deaths[The Hindu, 16.6.1998].Sedimentation r siltationplaguesai-most all the state'srivers,reservoirs ndbackwaters. oil erosioncausedbydefor-estationandvariousagricultural,miningand onstructionctivities ave ed o arge-scale siltationof the waterbodies. Theproblem s particularlycute in the caseof thereservoirs.thasreducedheirwater-holding apacityandaffected heutilityofthe dams.Siltationnthe mouthsof riverscauses,besidesnavigationbottlenecks, loodingand damage to the environment.Suchphenomena reconspicuous tAzhikode,Beypore,Ponnaniand Munambam.Thegovernmentpends akhs orclearing hesandbeds to keep the ports safe fornevigation nd protecthem rom loods.Siltation n the Vembanad ake seemsto havereached critical tage. tthreatensto turn he lake into a marsh n a matterof years.Thedamage o theecologyof thelakecausedby siltationand waterpollu-tion would be abysmal.Sandmining,hough dvocated ysomeas a solution to the siltationproblem, sin facta threat o theecologyof theriversystems.Apartromcausingbank rosion,flooding,salt waterincursion,pollution,etc, it is also lowering hewater evel andcausing drought n the valleys.Havingassumed angerous roportions,sandminingin the state has triggeredapeople'smovement osavetherivers romthe clutches of the construction obby.Peopleofthevalleysof theBharathapuzha,thePeriyar nd he Pamba rganised am-paignsfor the controlof sandmining nthese rivers hroughquotasandthefixingof areaandzone limits for the activity.Itbecameclear, however, hat n manyplaces the administration as subject opressure from various quarters. InErnakulamdistrict, the administrationyieldedto pressurerom theconstructionsector,including hose who have under-taken o buildanairport, four-lane oadandotherpublicutilities. tpermittedandmining n the Periyar,violatingmanyofthe recommendationsf an 'expertcom-mittee' constitutedby the government[The Indian Express, 19.4.1998].Sandmining,siltationandwaterpollu-tion have adverselyaffected the waterecologyof the state.Thishasexposed ishto diseases, mass mortalityand loss ofhabitat. he ndigenousisheryormahseer,themajor amefishof thestate, s report-edly becomingextinct.Next, damming and channelisation.These ctivitiesre irtuallyillingheriversof Kerala.ThePeriyarhas been dammed

1802 Economic and Political Weekly May 27, 2000

8/3/2019 4409317

4/5

at 14 sites. This has affected its waterflow. In several places the river has be-come virtually invisible. The fate of theBharathapuzhas even worse, with a largernumberof damscutting its tributaries.Theriver is virtually dry in the lower reachesin summer. This makes it easy prey tosand mining.Damming andconstriction of the waterflow has made the Pamba quite shallow.In many places the original riverbed,complete with clay and tree trunks, isreported obeexposed to view. Uncheckedsand mining has deepened the riverbed,causing landslides and floods during themonsoon. Deforestation and soil erosionupstream have caused siltation and riverconstriction downstream.A new dimension has been addedto thisproblemwith thegovernment constructinga sub-surfacedamatMaramon,ostensiblytoprotectthe sand bed accumulatedon oneside of the river- which is used seasonallyas a convention venue by Christian reli-gious groups every year. While the gov-ernment claims that this structure is im-portant for the irrigation of the region, ithas failed to respect the traditional use ofthis stretchof river for festivals bythe localHinducommunity,whichplies snake-boatsto the nearby Aranmula temple. This hasrousedthe ire of the community, which infact demolished certain stretches of thesub-surface dam which reportedly ob-structed the smooth passage of the boatsduring the Onam festival.Moreover, it is feared that the sub-sur-face dam would cause floods in the lowerbank side andeven lead to a change in thecourse of the river.Any damage caused tothe local community on this account maynotbe measurable on any economic scale.A similar threat to ecology and culturehas been reported in the north Wynadregion. The setting up of a hydro-electricproject there is seen to spell ruin for thekurichiatribesmen Rajeev 1998]. Thetribehasalreadyhadmuch land usurpedand itswomenfolk sexually exploited by settlersand government officials.Themany hydel projects planned forthenorthern istrictswill indeed ease thepowerproblem in the Malabarregion, but at anecological andculturalcost. Some bureau-cratsmay venture to say "You can't makean omlette without breaking a few eggs,andif the state needs the vital electricity,you have to pay its social costs too"[Rajeev 1998].The ethics of robbingone community topay anotheris not difficult to understand.ToquoteHeikoffagain:"Theirapproachesto this task vary according to the socialvalues and economic interests of those

whocontendorpoliticaldominancen thestatelegislatures."The mostdisturbing artof suchdevel-opments,however, is that they destroywhat sgenerally onouredn civilsocietyasthe'existencevalue'or 'bequest alue'of rivers or future enerations. heythusreverse the principleof 'non-decliningutility' for generationafter generation.This violates the cardinalprinciple ofsustainability.One fears that the culturalvalues oftraditionalommunities rebeing rampleduponfor wantof politicalpatronage ndorganised esistance.How farthe Keralamodel of politicaleconomywill preserveindigenouswaysof life is now aquestionof environmentalconomics.The situa-tion calls for an 'informedcitizenry'to'mountpressure' n 'vote-sensitiveegis-lators' [Owen 1980: 153].Coastal Zones

The mostcontroversial nddisturbingenvironmentalroblemn Kerala nrecenttimeshasbeen heproblem fcoastal onemanagement. hecrisis was heraldedbythe Keralagovernment ublishingnJuly1996 the coastalregulation one (CRZ)notification,ssuedbythecentral overn-ment in February1991.The notification seeks to protectthefragile eco-system of coastal areas byclassifying hem ntofour zones andpro-hibitingcertainactivitiesin each of thezones. Thefourzones are:CRZ-1,whichincludesecologicallysenitive areasandareasallingbetweenhe ow-tide ndhigh-tide lines; CRZ-2,which includesaerasthathavealreadybeendevelopedupto orclose to the shore line; CRZ-3, whichincludesareas that are relativelyundis-turbedandthatdo notbelongto eitherofthe first two zones; and CRZ-4,whichcovers coastalstretchesof the Andaman,Nicobar and Lakshadweepslands andsmall islandselsewhere.The activitiesprohibitedn thevariouszones include: he setting up of new in-dustriesandexpansionof existing ndus-tries;the manufacture,andling, torageor disposalof hazardous ubstances;hesettinguporexpansion f fish-processingunits,includingwarehousing;he settingup or expansionof units for the disposalof waste andeffluents;and thedischargeof untreatedwastes and effluents fromindustries,urban entresor otherhumansettlements.Theprohibitedctivities lso nclude hedumpingof city or town waste for landfillingorforanyotherpurpose;hedump-ingof ashoranywaste rom hermal owerstations; land reclamation,bundingor

disturbing the naturalcourse of sea water;the mining of sand, rock and other sub-stratamaterial;theharvesting or drawal ofgroundwater and the construction of amechanism for that within 200 metres ofthe high tide line.Also prohibited are construction activi-ties in ecologically sensitive areas, anyconstructionbetween the low-tide andhigh-tide lines and the dressing or altering ofsand dunes, hills and other natural fea-tures, including landscape changes forbeautification, recreation and other suchpurposes.The central government also issuedguidelines for the development of beachresort hotels in the designated areas ofCRZ-3 for temporary occupation by tour-ists subject to prior approval from theministry of environment and forests.It became apparentvery soon, however,that the state government was in no moodor position to implement the provisions ofthe CRZ rules. The government began toplead with New Delhi in collusion withthe hotel, tourism and builders' lobbies,for the exemption of Kerala from the pro-visions of the notification. [The Hindu,12.11.1996]. It argued that implementa-tion of the CRZ restrictions on construc-tion and otheractivities inthe coastal zoneswould adversely affect the state's eco-nomic development. The Kerala govern-mentalso appointedan 'expertcommittee'to suggest changes in theCRZs. However,several people's organisations in the state- theKeralaSastraSahityaParishat KSSP),the Kerala SwathanthraMatsyaThozhilaliFederation, the National Fish Workers'Forum, etc - demanded wholeheartedimplementation of the CRZ rules.They assertd that all the 13 prohibitorynorms in the CRZ notification were aimedatprotecting the wealth andwelfare of thecoastal people andthatthe politicians andothers who saidthe normswere against theinterests of the coastal fishermen weretrying to hoodwink the fishermen andpromote the narrowinterests of industrialand business lobbies [TheIndian Express,13.11.1996].The KSSP observed that the CRZ ruleswere in the spirit of agenda 21 of the UNconference on environment and develop-ment held in Rio de Janeiro,Brazl in 1992.Far from sharing the misgivings about therules voiced by political partiesandvestedinterests, the fishermen community heldthat the notification would help protect itsinterests, it said.The KSSP expressed the view that theCRZ notification, which prohibited thesetting upof new industries, theexpansionof existing industries, the discharge of

Economicand PoliticalWeekly May 27, 2000 1803

8/3/2019 4409317

5/5

untreated effluent and the dumping ofwaste, would help control pollution of theestuarine backwaters- which had contri-buted to the decline of the state's fishresources.Italsoasserted hat he fears of anadverseimpact on development voiced by certainlobbies were highly exaggerated. It notedthat the restrictions in fact applied only tothevery limitedstretchof the coastline (14per cent of the whole) which was statedto constitute a fragile eco-system andhistorically important sites, besides theinter-tidalzones. Withinthe 500-metre seafrontzones, restrictionshad been proposedonly over less than 2 percent of the whole'no development' zone.It was also pointed out that in Kerala'scoastaltowns(CRZ-2),where coastalroadsand approved built-in structures alreadyexisted, the CRZ rules did not prohibit theconstruction of new houses [The Hindu,21.1.1997].

That the state government has a ques-tionable attitude to the protection of thecoastalenvironment s abundantlyevident.Crucially, it is evident in its approach tothe promotion of intensive aquacultureinthe coastal belt, which the Supreme Courtdeclared ultravires the provisions of theCRZ rules in December 1996 andorderedwound up before April 30, 1997.

As is now well known, the Keralagovernment cquiescedn a centralgov-ernmentmove to reintroducehe aquac-ulturebillinparliament,ontraveningndbypassing hespiritof theCRZrulesandtheSupremeCourtudgment whichhadbannedall formsof intensiveaquaculturein the country.The stae government'sapathy s alsoevident fromits lackadaisical ttitude othe impositionof a permanentban ontrawling nd othepreventionfpollutionof the coastalenvironment,wetlandrec-lamation,mangrovedestruction, tc. Itsdilly-dallyingwith heCRZ uleshasmadeit plain hat t hasno will to promote us-tainabledevelopmentn thecoastalzone.ConclusionItseems that hemanagers f thepoliti-cal economyof Keralaare not interestedin followingthe principlesof conserva-tion,self-managementndsustainability.On the contraryhe stateand its admin-istrationare fast fallingin line with theglobalisation rocessbythrowingts natu-ral resourcesand its environment penfor aquaculture, ourism development,power production, etc, ignoring thepeople'sdemandor theprotection f theenvironmentand the maintenanceofsustainability.

Keralashould think afresh about itsmodel of developmentand the politicaleconomy it is now pursuing f it is todeserve being describedas 'god's owncountry' or the land of 'legendarycommunism'. It should abandon itsconsumerist,cowboy' approach.ReferencesAsheim, G B (1991): 'Defining Sustain-ability When Resource Management DoesNot Have Deterministic Consequences'(mimeo), Department of Economics,Universityof Oslo.Hanley N, J F Shogren and B White (1997):Environmental Economics in Theory and

Practice, Macmillan Press, London.Heikoff, J M (1980): Marine and ShorelandResourcesManagement,Ann ArborSciencePublishersInc, Ann Arbor.Owen, Oliver S (1980): Natural ResourceConservation - An Ecological Approach,Macmillan PublishingCo Inc, New York.Rajeev,P 1(1998): 'Will KurichiasBecome MereHistory? The Hindu, Thiruvananthapuram,June 28.State PlanningBoard(1994): Economic Reviewof Kerala, 1994, Government of Kerala,Thiruvananthapuram.TheHindu,Thiruvananthapuram1998): May 7,June 16 and June 17.The Indian Express, Cochin (1996, 1998):November 13, 1996 and April 19, 1998.

NEW FROM ORIENT LONGMANA SOURCEBOOK OF INDIAN CIVILIZATIONedited byNiharranjan Ray, B D Chattopadhyay,VR Mani and Ranabir ChakravartiThis book aims at familiarizing ts readerswith the variousaspectsthatgo into the makingof the historyof Indiancivilization.These aspects includematerial ife, technology,economic andsocial organization,polity, religionandphilosophy, literatureand art.The arrangement f the material n the chaptersand selections conforms to a rationallyconceived andplannedscheme of history.The contentof thebook presentsan extensive view of Indian ife andthought.81 250 1871 9 Rs 650.00ISSUES IN DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICSeditors Gautam Gupta,Manash Ranjan Gupta,BhaswarMoitraThis book deals withthe current opic of developmenteconomics. From the earlieremphasison the GeneralTheoryapproach, here hasbeen a shift towardsanalysisof specific problems;as well as an issue by issue discussion of certainmicroeconomicfoundationspertaining o the behaviourof economic agents, given the ambitof theseproblems.This volume is a compendiumof 10 papersdividedintothe following threesections:Labour n Development,DualEconomyModels in Development,and TradeandDevelopment.Eachsection is devoted to one particular spectof thedevelopmentprocess andexplores its theoreticalandempiricaldimensions.81 250 11668 Rs 150.00

Orient LongmanOrient Longman Limited, 36-272 Himayatnagar, Hyderabad 500 029

1804 Economic and Political Weekly May 27, 2000