Sustainable development (SD) in North East (NE)

Abstract : Sustainability and sustainable development, though have many shades, a broad
consensus have emerged among concerned and informed inhabitants, corporates, governments,
researchers and policy makers that due to the limited carrying capacity of planet earth, doing
business and leading life as usual is unsustainable. So by pivoting, changing and course
correcting the wasteful, hedonic consumption, by adopting pollution abatement and mitigating
measures, caring for planet, people and profit, would earn decent and sustained lifestyle to
people, continuity to flora and fauna and competitive advantage to organizations, a new lease of
life to trade and commerce. North East India has a serene and bountiful eco system and habitat, it
needs careful nurturing, a balanced outlook towards progress, development,autonomy, livelihood
for people as well as calibrated attempts towards infrastructure development, eco tourism and
other enterprises without harming the habitat.

Let us hear and reflect upon few gems of wisdom on the topic from domain experts, leaders and
scholars:

“The fulfillment of needs, need not be, be all and end all of sustainable development, but just a
part of a bigger entity, enhancing human freedoms (the ability to meet crucially important
economic needs, expanding political participation and broadening social opportunities) on a
sustainable basis, is sustainable development”- Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen.

“It is the poor who must buy water from vendors at many times the price paid by better-off
people who have service. Half of the world’s wetlands disappeared in the last century, and 20
percent of freshwater fish are now endangered or extinct” - Ian Johnson, World Bank VP, Look
at Sustainable Development, 2002.

‘Nature and man-made constraints have acted as obstacles to development of the

state’(Manipur). Thomas, 2001. Above assertion is more or less applicable for the whole of
North East, development is missing, more so sustainable development.

"The central government spends Rs 150 billion each year for the north-east. Had the money
been given directly to the people, poverty would have been alleviated by now", the then union
minister of state for commerce Jairam Ramesh, 2006, UPA – I.

Introduction

Globally, the population boom and industrial revolution brought about changes or
externalities, both positive and negative. The population created pressure on resources and the
industry, spurred by consumption and demand created externalities beyond the carrying capacity
of mother nature. Till 70’s, scholars and economists like (Friedman, 1970), kept on harping on
profit in a restricted look and worldview evolved from Classical theory of management by
Taylor about yield, output and profit. ‘The world is made for man, not man for the world’ –
Bacon, Dryzek J. 1997).

However, times were ‘a- changin’ as sung by Bob Dylan, perception and perspectives
evolved from only “profit maximization” to balanced growth, inclusive, holistic growth and
sustainable development as well as environment, in a balancing act. Closer home in India in
general and North East in particular, rapid development, LPG – (liberalization, privatization and
globalization, NOT the gas, as sneered by then Chief Election Commissioner T N Seshan!) and
in populous countries like India and China, delivered substantial benefits (removing 400,000
people from extreme poverty, higher standards of living etc), simultaneously placed higher
demands on resources, enhanced carbon emissions with global impacts (Eliott 2003).

In Changing Course (Schmidheiny, 1992) showed corporate involvement in the environment,

albeit after denial and disparaging the environmental movement:

1970s saw the somewhat sub optimal solutions - the prevention of pollution, an ‘end of the pipe’
stop gap arrangement, an afterthought.

1980 - measures of self-regulation and a concern to incorporate sustainability into business

practices in the 1990s.

1990s - holistic worldview of Triple Bottomline (Elkington 2018), The Balanced Scorecard
(Kaplan & Norton, 1992) etc. the period post-Rio conference, saw environmental concerns
internalized, and made a central part of corporate governance. MNC’s, progressive ones or those
who cared about their reputation and goodwill other than financial bottom lines, adopted
environmental and sustainability frameworks. The corporate governance, ethics and CSR became
part of the rhetoric and buzzwords.

Sustainable development has many names ‘ecological modernization’ (Mol, 2001), cleaner
technologies ‘win/win’, ‘industrial ecology’ or ‘life cycle assessment’ (LCA) are some that are
more common.

Organizations like Proctor and Gamble and Unilever, quickly grasped the commercial benefits,
governments like France and Scandinavian countries also took climate change, sustainability,
emission abatement seriously, US has been ambivalent and in the current Trump dispensation
and regime, often the establishment ridicules the climate change and allied concerns, make
policies that are actually against the philosophy of pollution abatement and mitigation in the
name of growth and development.

Against the school of thought of Pollution Haven Hypothesis (PHH), that developing countries
end up receiving the dirty technologies (chrome tanning, breaking of nuclear waste filled ships
for example) there are contrary examples available too. Johnson, 2000 wrote about Exporting
Environmentalism by US Multinational Chemical Corporations in Brazil and Mexico in the hope
of finding SCA – sustainable competitive advantage. Bunker, 1996 gave an opposing view about
oversights and distortions in industrial ecology. Cleaner industry in one location can also mean
the redistribution of environmental risks to other locations, and the process of ‘greening’ industry
is neither as transparent nor as disinterested as many corporations avow. Sometimes sustainable
development is outright greenwashing and PR (Public Relation), scoring brownie points, without
being green actually.

As against suspected greenwashing cases, few genuine sustainable efforts are also recorded.
‘1995 Group’ of companies under the aegis of World Wide Fund for Nature (UK), are working
to make timber industry more sustainable. Forest Stewardship Council allows usage of FSC logo
(WWF, 1996). Similarly, seafood, hilsa fish from Hooghly and Padma river, Bengal and
Bangladesh respectively, coffee in S America and other products world over being brought under
stewardship umbrella.

Eco labeling, EIA (Environmental Impact assessment), EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility)
would reduce greenwashing, if checks and balances work.

There are negative impacts of globalization on the environment, supply chain wide certification
programs, political representation, would be needed for genuine sustainable and stewardship
programs.

Redclift, 2004 has revealed the chewing gum industry example in US, suppliers of Wrigley’s,
exhausted chicle, the natural resin that formed the basis for gum during the first half of the
20th century by unsustainable harvesting. Any stewardship now is too late, like so called
Nuclear powers after detonating their own devices and creating military nuclear capability are
preaching Non proliferation for others to maintain their own hegemony!!!

The sustainable development in the area of economic growth, is missing (Middleton et al.,
1993). A red herring on population growth in the south, diverts attention from non sustainable
resource intensive production system of the north and its implications for environment. The
global equity is missing too. The USA, consumes disproportionate amount of resources. In the
last 50 years world trade has grown 17-fold, north south divide has grown exponentially,
developed – developing world, industrial and emerging countries widened, the have nots are
getting worse. The gulf between the richest 20% and the poorest 20% has become wider; from
a factor of 30 in the 1960s to 86 in 1997, with the three richest people having more assets than
600 million people, equity is just a rhetoric (UNDP, 1999). The disparity and inequality has
increased in developed nation too. The much touted trickle-down effect not happened, rich
poor divide increased, rich are getting richer and the poor the poorer. Malaria, a poor man’s
disease to contract and get ruined, kills 5000 African children a day, can be treated easiy
(Rabinovich, 2002).
World Conservation Strategy (IUCN et al., 1980) made the word Sustainable Development in
traction, the Brundtland Report’s meeting ‘the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their needs’ (WCED, 1987) brought the society, community,
future generations perspective. This defines needs from a human standpoint; ‘sustainable
development is an unashamedly anthropocentric concept’(Lee 2000). Workshop on Urban
Sustainability of the US National Science Foundation (2000, p. 1) did warn about sustainability
being ‘laden with so many definitions that it risks plunging into meaninglessness, at best, and
becoming a catchphrase for demagogy, at worst. [It] is used to justify and legitimate a myriad
number of policies and practices ranging from communal agrarian utopianism to large-scale
capital-intensive market development’ or simply a politicians rhetoric or a fake / pseudo green
industrialist’s green washing humbug or hyperbole.

Arm chair intellectuals and few researchers debated about weak and strong sustainability
(Haughton and Hunter, 1994). Weak sustainability is mostly having pro anthropocentric tilt
(Daly and Cobb, 1989).

Strong sustainability faction adopted an against anthropocentric rhetoric, claimed that human
made capital cannot replace a multitude of processes vital to human existence like the ozone
layer, photosynthesis or the water cycle (Rees, 1998; Roseland, 1998). The non-human species,
natural systems and biodiversity have rights and values in themselves (Naess, 1989). Pearce et al.
(1989) urge the internalization of hitherto externalized environmental costs and a recalculation of
environmental benefits.

The strong and weak factions, however, are worried about environmental issues only, ignoring
socio-economic consequences. In Taylor’s classical management, people were just a means,
yield and output mattered more. Chaplin lampooned that in celebrated movie Modern Times.
Behavioral management thinkers like Mary Follett brought in behavioral aspect, even in the days
of prevailing perspectives of profit maximization of Friedman, researchers like Schumacher 1973
emphasized that “people mattered”, even “have nots”, tribals and natives mattered, though often
that remains just a lip service.

As against weak sustainability faction, strong or deep ecologists sympathise and empathise more
with environment and the nature but ignore human needs and equity. Bradford (1989), indicated
racism and support for imperialism as well as an anti-human outlook behind ‘nature first’
rhetoric of Deep ecologists, “the famine in Ethiopia is ‘the best thing would be to just let nature
seek its own balance, to let the people there just starve’- David Foreman, one of the founders of
.Earth First! (Bradford, 1989), Bramwell (1989) said some green thinking is fascist

As usual, experts in sustainability and sustainable development domain, do not agree, still in this
smokescreen of diverging viewpoints we would try to make sense of SD in NE, trying to ‘agree
to disagree, agreeably’.
SD in NE

Sustainable development globally is a massive challenge, particularly in developing countries

and that too in North East India, which is sort of cut off geographically as well as politically,
not exactly mainstream in public sentiment though strategically and militarily sensitive, poses
even more complicated scenarios, difficult choices and unpalatable trade offs.

Following Buddha’s Middle Path; mass production, mass consumption have to be rationalized
and mass waste have to be minimized. Blatant consumerism has to be controlled, so sometimes
de-marketing is needed. The above issues are more or less same globally, be it North or South,
North East or South West. In India, across the length and breadth, however, nuances differ and
perspectives too. In this chapter, we would take a holistic look about sustainable development
issues and challenges in NE India.

If Kashmir (Srinagar) is known as Venice of the East or Paradise on Earth, NE is known as

‘paradise unexplored’ (Rai, 2015) or “the hidden land” (Mitra, 1998).

North East, or the land of the seven sisters, was named so in 1972, include:

1. Arunachal Pradesh,
2. Assam,
3. Manipur (‘land of jewels’)
4. Meghalaya,
5. Mizoram,
6. Nagaland and
7. Tripura,

Now a days Sikkim is included in NE, was added in 1975, increasing the list to eight.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_North_East_India
8% of the country's geographical area and roughly 4 per cent of its population is in NE. There
are abundant ethnic, linguistic, cultural, religious, physiographical and last but not the least,
biodiversity. NE, barring Sikkim, is spread about 2,55,168 Sq. Km. (iitg.ac.in, 2019, Sachdeva,
2000)

As far as former congress minister Jairam Ramesh’s comment cited above, the scenario is no
different in BJP regime of UP (Mid Day Meal scam of Aug 2019 wherein Namak Roti (salt &
Bread) were provided to kids while funds are salted away, sweaters could not be provided as
commission and speed money haggling went on for too long and Minister Anupama Jaiswal was
sacked), Chief Minister of Bengal, Mamata Banerjee herself ordering officials of TMC
(Treenamool Congress) the ruling party, to return the cut money – a euphemism for omission and
commission. In Bihar, BJP-JD (U) coalition saw massive scams in Mid Day Meal schemes
wherein scores of kids died due to corruption, adulteration of cooking oil by principal and other
functionaries of school. But here we would concentrate on North East only.

Development and more so, sustainable development in NE is low or missing, why?

We may not have all the answers but quite a few have been gathered from extant literature:

1. Law and order situation The state, non-state actors, ethnic insurgent groups, willy-nilly
trigger and provoke the inter-ethnic and intra-ethnic conflicts. Sachdeva 2000, studied
and concluded that inappropriate economic policy framework created an unbalanced
and unsustainable economy and destroyed the basis for institutions of a modern market
economy in the NE region, giving rise to secessionist and separatist movement and
mass alienation. Frequent bandhs, economic blockades by various groups and political
parties, the extortion bids, 'insurgency tax' are the biggest disincentives to investment in
the region.

2. Unstable relation with neighboring countries mainly China, Myanmar and Bangladesh,
some neighbors are less than friendly.
Political and administrative corruption, omission and commission, patronage, rent
seeking tendencies, quid pro quo. The leakage, pilferage and evaporation loss, rent seeking tendencies by
politicos, their henchmen and the coterie of yes men and loyalists siphon off the fund and the common man is left abegging,
making there by a gulf of distrust, alienation even anti national and anti establishment feelings. Lack of political autonomy
have given rise to sycophancy and ad hocism, patronage and corruption, government monopoly in employment, loss of
work ethic have contributed in disappointment and disenchantment. The subsidy and sops create a sense of dependency
and perpetuity not to talk of patronage and give and take, quid pro quo. Internal, sustainable fund generation is nil or
negligible, so centre is the sole fund provider. Some specific cases of leakages are mentioned below:
 The unearthing of the Rs 1,000 crore scam in Dima Hasao district (earlier North
Cachar Hills district) in Assam in 2010
 Dima Halam Daogah (Jewel Gorlosa) (dhd-j) led by Dilip Nunisa to procure
arms and ammunition and wage war against the Indian nation state.
3. Prevalence of Jhum (shifting) cultivation. Protecting standing crops from floods and
droughts is a challenge.

4. Lack of skills, credit and market opportunities

5. Lack of participative, bottoms up management, lack of true federalism and autonomy,

diktats imposed from Centre, N Delhi, articulated and shaped by ruling party and its
docile bureaucrats have failed to deliver. Monopoly of government sector in employment
has ruined entrepreneurship and innovation. Say of common man, SHG’s and community
elders should have equal importance as those of bureaucrats, fund sanctioning authorities
and central agencies (Baruah, 2003).

6. Infra – road and rail network, telecommunication or health, education. Lack of

infrastructure, is a big challenge of NE, more than in the remaining part of the country,
trade & commerce are the worst hit activities, however, unbridled developments on infra,
like Uttarakhand, is also not the solution. Uncontrolled infrastructural development may
cause flash floods, landslides and such, so a judicious balance is called for, vetted by,
genuine and neutral domain experts, without any vested or conflict of interests. Often the
so called EIA’s (Environment Impact Assessment) are rigged by corporate houses, and /
or politico – contractor-industrialist nexus.(Singh, 2006)

7. The habitat gets degraded due to developmental projects, population influx causes
demography changes (Dasgupta & Dey 2010).

8. Uranium mining in the east and in the north-east has caused displacement and
rehabilitation issues. Reserves found in Nagaland, Arunachal and Assam (thehindu.com,
2009). Unless the development and sustainability issues are handled sensibly, resistance
like Meghalaya (Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council - KHADC) are possible
(downtoearth, 2017).

9. Labour Policy – Unlike the conventional wisdom and popular myth, the NE is a labour
scarce economy! The labour intensive government schemes in the areas of animal
husbandry, fisheries, the Jawahar Rozgar Yojana and others have been a non starter.
Despite all the brouhaha of outsider invasion and the grand fiasco of NRC (National
Register of Citizenship) of late, labour (both skilled and unskilled) is a big problem in
the region with the possible exception of the Brahmaputra Valley and Tripura. Already
outside labour (mainly from Bangladesh, Myanmar and other parts of India) is a crucial
factor in both agricultural as well as non-agricultural activities of the region. In Tripura,
tribals have become a minority.
10. Infra projects like hydro electricity are not magic bullets. Demerits include loss of agricultural land, with adverse
consequences for livelihoods of affected people, rehabilitation challenges (Gupta and Asher 1998: 117; Trussart et al 2002;
Isaacman 2005), altered river flows, and loss of wildlife habitat.

11. The landholding community getting compensation from government and / or private industries is fine, they should be
provided with investment guidance too for sustainable long term usage.

12. The Dinesh Goswami Report (1988), L.C. Jain Report (1990) and Cooper & Lybrand Report (1995) reported the issue of
non-availability of suitable land (in terms of size and location) for setting up industries.

13. The natural resources, profits, savings are, in fact, moving away from the region to other high productivity regions.

14. Rural livelihood or lack of it, causes farmer suicides. Since 1995, ¼ of 10 lac Indian
farmers have killed self, 2009 figure is 17638 and 2015 figure is 95 in NE.

Source: KARMAKAR, 2017.

15. Plugging the transmission loss from power distribution lines and various other leakages are the ways to generate
resources sustainably. The non-plan revenue expenditure have to be curbed. Leaders want populist measures but
economics demands income tax be introduced for tribals in the NE. For economics’ sake income tax for
tribals should be introduced along with glitch free, corruption free, welfare schemes.
 16. Despite huge opportunities and potential, Northeast attracts less than 1% of the total
tourist arrivals in India. Deloitte 2017, cited 4 reasons for the gap:

1. lack of proper infrastructure,

2. inadequate marketing, and
3. scarcity of skilled manpower and
4. absence of a broad tourism policy for the region as a
whole.

Areas of sustainable development in north east (proposed) drawing examples from other
parts of India and abroad:

 Sustainable rural livelihood – SEWA (www.sewa.org), a women SHG (self help group),
NGO can collaborate to replicate women empowerment and earning a sustainable and
respectable livelihood.

 Access to sustainable energy – Selco (incidentally India has a commitment of 23 GW of

renewable capacity by 2013.

 PPP like IIFCO Kisan Sanchar limited (IKSL), ITC’s e Chaupal, helping farmers with
weather info saving crop loss etc, similar with Fisher Friend to get higher catch by getting
optimal fishing zone info Vodafone 2009. Elliot, 2013. Traditional ecological knowledge
(TEK) is a gold mine and repository of knowledge and wisdom, this needs to be nurtured
and tapped for optimal usage of all stakeholders.

 A bottoms up approach in services – particularly tourism, eco tourism, community-based

tourism, nature-based tourism - preserving environment, ST-EP (sustainable tourism —
eliminating poverty), in a truly participatory processes in benefit sharing mode, as against
benefit laundering mode so prevalent so far, are some of the options. Eco and community
based tourism can address urban as well as rural sustainable livelihood issues, provided
checks and balances are in place like over crowding, deforestation, plastic and other
pollution, politico-bureaucrat-cop-judiciary-mercenary nexus is curbed. The tourist
activities “leading to management of all resources in such a way that economic, social
and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining cultural integrity, essential
ecological processes, biological diversity and life support systems” (UN, 2001a, WTO).
The trickle down effect, dis-intermediation would benefit the down trodden, common
man at grass root level addressing somewhat the alienation, disenchantment and
secessionist tendencies, this would create jobs for women and unskilled workers and
would contribute in women empowerment and poverty alleviation. Arunachal Pradesh
can be a hub of herbal products, bamboo products and eco-tourism, sustainable trade as
well as good to raise the per capita income. The North East like Uttaranchal and
 Himachal Pradesh, have hilly terrain, serene and scenic landscape. They offer lots of
tourism and hospitality opportunities and avenues to harness hydroelectricity.

 All stakeholders, ranging from governments and large businesses to local communities,
Green activists, NGO’s, not just human centric anthropogenic issues, with a humane
thought spared for even endangered species, flora and fauna, keeping bio diversity intact.

 Saving rivers from pollution is also an important SD agenda. NE should be wary of

Ganga River pollution and Yamuna River pollution of North and central and east India.

 Traditional emphasis on infra (roads) have to be carefully weighed to factor in the risk -
landslides (Agarwal, 1998). Funding is not the problem. Rs 14,409.08 crore was allocated in the The Eleventh
Plan for the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (doner) Kazi 2013.

 CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) spend – IOCL spends comparatively better than others. It spent 19.29% of its total
expenditures for betterment of NE, Tata Steel spends nil. Ongc- 3.88%, RIL – 1.68% are almost insignificant, Assam got
the lion’s share, all figures are for 2014-15 . (Kafle, 2017)

(Rs. in crore)

Budget Revised
Year Expenditure * Data pertaining to 53
Estimate Estimate
out of 54 Ministries is based on details
2014- furnished by respective Ministries, while
36,107.56 27,359.17 24819.18
15 data of one Ministry is based on PFMS.
** Data pertaining to 48 out of 54
2015-
29,087.93 29,669.22 28673.73 Ministries is based on details furnished
16
by respective Ministries, while data of six
2016- Ministries is based on PFMS.
29,124.79 32,180.08 29367.90
17
2017-
43,244.64 40,971.69 39,753.44*
18
2018-
47,994.88 47,087.95 45,518.14**
19

Source: https://pib.gov.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=191820

Poverty Estimates (Combined)

Number Below Poverty Line Headcount Ratio (%)
(Lakhs)
State 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12
 1 Arunachal 3.6 3.5 4.9 54.5 31.1 25.9 34.7
Pradesh
2 Assam 97.3 116.4 101.3 51.8 34.4 37.9 32
3 Manipur 8.7 270.8 197.9 65.1 38 24.5 17.4
4 Meghalaya 3.9 12.5 10.2 35.2 16.1 47.1 36.9
5 Mizoram 1.4 4.9 3.6 11.8 15.3 17.1 11.9
6 Nagaland 1.9 2.3 2.3 20.4 9 21.1 20.4
7 Sikkim 1.8 43.5 102.9 31.8 31.1 15.9 14.7
8 Tripura 13.7 0.8 82.6 32.9 40.6 13.1 11.3
9 India 4,076.1 3,546.8 2,697.8 45.3 37.2 29.8 21.9
Source: https://niti.gov.in/state-statistics, accessed on 25/9/19

In some NE states, the situation is getting worse, highlighted in red above, they are worse off
than national average and over the years, things are deteriorating. For example, Assam, Manipur,
Sikkim and Tripura, people are dropping below poverty line in large numbers. In % terms,
Arunachal, Assam, Manipur and Tripura are faring worse than national average; they need to
have a helping hand in poverty elimination, income boost, social benefits in the area of health,
nutrition and education.

Coffee Board started a projet of growing coffee in non traditional areas including North East,
providing techno commercial inputs, training and development and market linkage to coffee
auction houses and traders in Kerala. This should help to some extent in poverty alleviation,
empowerment and economic prosperity. Unlike big bang projects like road infra, dams or nature
parks, these micro interventions do not displace natives and they can continue living their earlier
life style with some augmentation in livelihood etc. The farming, post harvest technologies and
management interventions are scalable without causing much harm to habitats and communities,
unless massive unsustainable practices are adapted like excessive usage of chemicals
(insecticides, pesticides fungicides etc). Extending to other non traditional areas make the coffee
plantation immune from common diseases (leaf rust and stem borer) too. (DAILY NEWS &
ANALYSIS (DNA); 2009).

The provision of employment (however, temporary work on construction sites, and casual labor
without permanent benefits may not be a sustainable proposition), welfare, and market
accessibility benefit the locals (World Commission on Dams 2000: 99–102, 121; Koch 2002).
Chandy et al 2012.

No of colleges per lac population States

All india 28

North East 18

Manipur 30

Arunachal Pradesh 18

Mizoram 22

Assam 15

Meghalaya 18

Nagaland 26

Tripura 12

Sikkim 20

Source: Sachdeva, 2000.

Except Manipur, all NE states are behind national average, although NE states score high as far
as literacy percentage is concerned:

Literacy level %

Manipur 79.85

Arunachal Pradesh 66.95

Mizoram 91.58

Assam 73.18

Meghalaya 75.48

Nagaland 80.11

Tripura 87.5

Sikkim 82.2

Source: Census, 2011

Mizoram, has one of the highest literacy levels in the country, Kerala tops the list.
Three UNESCO World Heritage Sites (Total number in India is 35) are in North East offering
much scope for Safari and allied tourism and hospitality opportunities (Unesco)

Assam:

1. Kaziranga Wildlife Sanctuary, Golaghat and Nagaon districts,

Manas Wildlife Sanctuary, Orang National Park – Darrang and
Sonitpur district,
Dibru-Saikhowa National Park -Tinsukia.
Nameri National Park - Nameri National Park is in the foothills of
the Eastern Himalayas in the Sonitpur District;

2. Khangchendzonga National Park in Sikkim.

3. Namdapha National Park, Arunachal Pradesh

Meghalaya:
4. Balphakram National Park-Garo Hills, ("abode of perpetual
winds", "land of spirits").
5. Nokrek National Park-West Garo Hills district of.

Other prominent locations of tourist and hospitality importance:

Assam

Wildlife Sancturies: Bhejan-Borajan-Padumoni etc.

• Leisure/scenic beauty spot: Chandubi, Bhairabkunda,

• Pilgrimage sites: Guwahati (Kamakhya Temple), Hajo

Sikkim

• the various mountain peaks of Himalya, Cho Lhamu lake is the highest lake in the country and
sixth highest in the world

• Buddhist Monasteries of prominence such as Pemayangtse Monastery

Meghalaya

• Cherapunjee and Mawsynram are famous for all round rainy season

• Caving

Tripura
• Tripurasundari Temple

• Neermahal Palace

• Heritage Park

• Sepahijala Wild life Sanctuary

Arunachal Pradesh

• Tawang (Buddist monastery)

• Ziro (famous for Ziro music festival)

• Namdapha Tiger project in Changlang district

• "Orchid Paradise"

Nagaland

• Kohima, Dimapur, Mokokchung, Longleng etc.

• The Hornbill Festival which showcases the tribal heritage.

Mizoram

Mizoram National Parks:

Ngengpui Wildlife Sanctuary,

Phawngpui National Park,

Thorangtlang Wildlife Sanctuary

Typical industries that can grow and prosper in North East without causing much harm to
environment are:

1. bamboo,
2. cane,
3. wood and precious medicinal plants.
4. Forest-based industries such as plywood mills, paper mills, saw mills etc.
5. The tea, oil and timber (TOT) in Assam, and mining, saw mills and plywood factories
in other NE states are the industry mainstay.

Swadesh Darshan in general and following in particular would be beneficial in sustainable

development, employment generation and earning boost of locals as well as state and central
government:
 Assam

Tea Museum in Dibrugarh

• Assam Tourist Development Corporation signing a MoU with Rightstay, a subsidiary of

MakeMyTrip, to promote homestay

Manipur

‘Destination Manipur’ - Manipur Sangai Festival, campaign by Manipuri govt in 2016.

Meghalaya

• ‘Bilgaro Challenge 2016’ (to promote motor sports & tourism )

2 recreational parks in Mairang & Marngar

Mizoram

The state govt with central funding has started eco tourism project, developing Chalfilh as
tourist destination are such initiatives in right direction. Medical tourism is another area of
potential to attract medical tourists from South and South East Asian countries.

The Present Economic Policy Framework

NE states enjoy Special Category States; benefits include 90 per cent of Central Assistance as a
grant and 10 per cent as loan.

Solution is a market-oriented approach, economic factors and less on political and cultural
factors.

Free flow of factors of production like European Union and decentralization.

Central assistance & State Government Finances

With Rs 50169.39 crore allocated in the budget 2019, the, highest ever allocation, NE is sitting
over a pile of cash, now it’s upto the implementation team that the lowest common denominator
gets the benefit and all this money is not salted away or misused or abused. From last year’s
allocation of Rs 39,201 crore of 2018-19, this is a 27% hike.

The Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (MDoNER) provides

assistance for projects prioritized by State Governments of North Eastern States
for filling gaps in physical infrastructure.
The funds allocated to the Ministry has increased from:
2015-16 - Rs. 2362.74 crores to
2018-19 - Rs. 3000.0 crore (27% up)
Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (MdoNER) schemes of interest are listed
below:
North East Special Infrastructure Development Scheme (NESIDS)
Schemes of North Eastern Council (NEC)
North East Road Sector Development Scheme (NERSDS)
North East Venture Fund (NEVF)
Science & Technology Interventions in the North East Region (STINER)
An amount of Rs.1156 crore has been allocated to North Eastern Council for the year 2018-19.
The North Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd (NEDFI) under the Ministry of
Development of North Eastern Region (DoNER) has set up the North East Venture Fund
(NEVF). The capital commitment to the fund is Rs.100.00 crore with an initial contribution of
Rs.75.00 crore consisting of Rs.45.00 crore from Ministry of DoNER and Rs.30.00 crore from
NEDFI, Rs.25.00 crore in-principle commitment from Small Industries Development Bank of
India (SIDBI).

States Share of gross transfers from the Centre to

aggregate disbursements (%)
Mizoram 88
Arunachal Pradesh 83
Assam 69
All India average 42

Devolution and Transfer of Resources

Period Central assistance (Rs, Billion)

1990-91 to 1998-99 to north east 600
1990-91 to 1998-99 to Orissa (Orissa is more 250
backward than NE)

Period Eighth Plan Per capita Central assistance (Rs)

National average 1,080
Arunachal Pradesh 36,000
Mizoram 32,567
Nagaland 23,177
Special category States Himachal Pradesh 5,921
 Special category States, Jammu & Kashmir 9,754
Special category States, Assam 3,161
economically poorest State of India, Bihar 876

Source: Sachdeva, 2000.

The gross block of Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSE) worth Rs. 133.18 billion was in
the North East, mostly in Assam. (5 % of total, more than 5 per cent of its employment in
India).

Self sufficiency, autonomy and decentralization demands that too much dependency on centre
needs to be controlled. For that to happen, the way forward is revenue generation by broad
basing sales tax, irrigation revenues and taxes from power and transport.

As there is no free lunch, implementation of projects based on market principles would have
some cost, in Assam, a World Bank funded irrigation rehabilitation project, requires a part of
the cost to be borne by farmers.

Private Investment & PPP (Public Private Partnership)

Productivity improvement, technology upgradation, improvement in work culture and ethics

would make NE developed sustainably.

Apex bodies of Indian Industry - Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), the Bengal Chamber
of Commerce & Industry (BCCI) and the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce &
Industry (FICCI) want to do their part and they have made their contribution in following
ways: .

BCCI - new Guwahati Chapter conducts EXPO-Northeast.

FICCI - round table on economic development of the Northeast.

CII events - SUNRISE (Summit of NE States for Regional Initiative and Shared Enterprise)

Three dimensional initiative. Cultural integration (SUN safaris, SUN academy, SUN sport),
geographical integration (SUN port, SUN route, SUN river, SUN air); and industrial
integration (SUN farms, SUN crafts, and SUN ventures).

Reliance Industries - Rs. 40 billion Tengakhat Gas Cracker Plant, telecommunications projects.

Land Policy

North East in general and Assam in particular, have much scope for commercialised
agriculture, cash crops - tea plantations, horticulture, rubber plantations, floriculture,
sericulture, etc have much scope.
Rubber Board and of late Coffee Board, have projects in NE.

Infrastructural Improvement - Power, road telecom, healthcare

As per S.P. Shukla Commission, infrastructural requirements for the region is worth Rs 936
billion. Though north east has a reserve hydro-electric potential — 30,000 and 40,0000 MW,
only Meghalaya is self reliant in power. Arunachal Pradesh has prospect of about 30,000 MW,
but materialised 25 MW only. Today more than fifteen new power projects, including those in
the private sector, are at different stages of implementation. Lower Kopili and Tipaimukh.
Ogden Energy of the US. Bongaigaon Thermal power Station on lease for its renovation and
upgradationis an important project.

Geographical Advantage

All the seven States of the region are on international borders.

The potential market covers many countries - China, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Laos, Thailand,
Vietnam, Cambodia as well as Malaysia, Indonesia and few more. In order to tap this Asian
market, different government agaencies Central and NE states can yield handsome returns.

How to tackle smuggling and make money out of it

The unauthorised trade can not be wished away by denial. Making it authorised trade would
need an ecosystem and facilitation, not a command and control, bureaucratic structure. The
usual bribe and corruption story about transportation on Indian roads continue in NE as well.
On National Highways 39 and 53, the going rate of the expenditure including freight, taxes,
hire charges and speed money (payments to various underground groups, and money paid to
almost every police and forest checkpost):

Moreh to Dimapur is about Rs 50,000 per truck

Imphal to Guwahati is more than Rs 35,000 per truck.

Making this area as Free Trade Areas would solve lot of smuggling and unauthorised trade. In
August 1999, the "Kunming Initiative", Yunnan, China was launched to promote a growth
quadrangle between India, China, Myanmar and Bangladesh.

Conclusion

Though it is tempting to offer almighty quickfix solutions, unfortunately, there is none. The road
to success as Einstein said is 90% perspiration and 10% inspiration! A slow and tortuous process,
not an overnight wonder, snake oil miracle. As cited above, populist, short term, vote and
constituency pleasing maneuvers may win a battle, but only long term, sometimes unpopular
decisions, no nonsense measures would win the war.
“The 12th Five Year Plan (2012-17) Document of Planning Commission has observed that larger
plan investment and focus on infrastructure development has resulted in average growth of gross
domestic product in NE States at 9.8 % which was higher than the national average of 8 %
during the 11th Five Year Plan (2007-2012) period”- NER Vision 2020. On a note of caution,
and with a pinch of salt about all official statistics too, GDP is a misnomer and a flawed metric to
measure development and welfare, nor “money can buy one love or happiness, to paraphrase
Beatles, so genuine sustainable development can not be measured by GDP, but Triple
Bottomline or Balanced Scorecard of NE as if, NE is an enduring, agile, smart organization
ready to adapt, reinvent, pivot and move on for a better, for a prosperous tomorrow, a developed,
a sustainably developed tomorrow!

References:

Agarwal, A., 1998, ‘Mayhem in Arunachal’, Down to Earth 7(11). 31 October (Centre for
Science and Environment, New Delhi). Available online at: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/
editors/ShowEditorHeadlines.asp?TopicID¼17‘‘\t’’_blank

Baruah, S; 2003, Nationalizing Space: Cosmetic Federalism and the Politics of Development in
Northeast India, Development and Change 34(5): 915–939.

Bramwell A. 1989, Ecology in the Twentieth Century: a history. Yale University Press: London

Bunker S G, 1996, Raw materials and the global economy: oversights and distortions in
industrial ecology. Society and Natural Resources 9: 419–429.

Bradford G, 1989, How Deep is Deep Ecology? Times Change Press: Ojai, California

Chandy, T, Rodney J. Keenan, R. John Petheram and Peter Shepherd ; 2012, Impacts of
Hydropower Development on Rural Livelihood Sustainability in Sikkim, India: Community
Perceptions, Mountain Research and Development, Vol. 32, No. 2, Green Economy and
Livelihoods in Mountains (May), pp. 117-125

Daly H, Cobb J, 1989, For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Towards Community,
the Environment and a Sustainable Future. Green Print: London; 267–273. Transport and the
Regions (DETR). 1999. A Better Quality of Life: a Strategy for Sustainable Development for the
United Kingdom. DETR: London.

Dasgupta, G, I Dey, 2010, State of Research on Forced Migration in the East and North-East,
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 45, No. 21 (MAY 22-28), pp. 37-41
Deloitte Tohmatsu – Ficci 2017 study, Developing Service Sector Linkages in North East North
East Connectivity Summit.

DFID [Department for International Development], 1999, Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance

Sheets. London: DFID. http://www.eldis.org/vfile/ upload/1/document/0901/section1.pdf;

DAILY NEWS & ANALYSIS (DNA); 08 Sep 2009;Pg 22.

https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/mining/won-t-grant-nocs-to-uranium-mining-projects-in-
meghalaya-khasi-district-council-57156, accessed on 25/9/2019.

Dryzek J, 1997,The Politics of the Earth, Oxford University Press.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/budget-2019-northeast-india-gets-
rs-50169-39-crore-highest-ever-allocation/articleshow/70097548.cms, accessed on 25/09/2019.

Eliott, J A; 2003, An introduction to Sustainable Development, 4 ed, Routledge.

Elkington, J., 2018, "25 Years Ago I Coined the Phrase "Triple Bottom Line." Here's
Why It's Time to Rethink It", Harvard Business Review, 25 June 2018

Friedman, M, 1970, The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits, The New
York Times Magazine September 13.

Garcia Johnson R., 2000, Exporting Environmentalism: US Multinational Chemical

Corporations in Brazil and Mexico. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

Gupta A, Asher MG, 1998. Environment and the Developing World: Principles, Policies, and
Management. Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley.

Haughton G, Hunter C, 1994, Sustainable Cities, Kingsley: London.

http://www.iitg.ac.in/rcilts/phaseI/n_e.html, accessed on 22/09/2019.

S KARMAKAR in Guwahati, 20.03.17, Rise in farmer suicides in NE, Indian Telegraph.

KAZI, SYED SULTAN, 2013, Plugging the Leaks: North-East India and Development,
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 48, No. 44 (NOVEMBER 2), pp. 21-23

Isaacman A, 2005, Displaced people, displaced energy, and displaced memories: The case of
Cahora Bassa, 1970–2004. International Journal of African Historical Studies 38(2):201–238.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 40034919.
IUCN, UNEP, WWF, 1980, World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for
Sustainable Development, IUCN: Gland, Switzerland.

Kafle, N., 2017, Volume 6, Issue 6 (June, 2017)

Kaplan & Norton, 1992, The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that drive performance, Harvard
Business Review, Jan-Feb, 71-79.

Lee K, 2000, Global sustainable development: its intellectual and historical roots, In Global
Sustainable Development in the 21st Century, Lee K, Holland A, McNeill D (eds), Edinburgh
University Press: Edinburgh; 31–47.

Middleton N, O’Keefe P, Moyo S., 1993, Tears of the Crocodile: from Rio to Reality in the
Developing World, Pluto: London.

Mitra, A; 1998, Environment and sustainable development in the hilly regions of North‐East
India, International Journal of Social Economics , ISSN: 0306-8293, 1 March.

Mol A, 2001. Globalisation and Environmental Reform: the Ecological Modernisation of the
Global Economy. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

Naess A., 1989, Ecology Community and Life Style, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Nayar, K. R.; 1994, Politics of 'Sustainable Development' Source: Economic and Political
Weekly, Vol. 29, No. 22 (May 28), pp. 1327-1329.

http://necouncil.gov.in/about-us/nec-vision-2020-0, accessed on 25/9/2019.

Neto, F; A new approach to sustainable tourism development: Moving beyond environmental

protection, Natural Resources Forum 27 (2003) 212–222.

negreens.com_article_details-funds-north-east-region-2018-19.html

Pearce D, Markandya A, Barbier E.,1989, Blueprint for a Green Economy. Earthscan: London.

Rabinovich R., 2002, Africa’s economic problems have a medical solution, The Guardian 8 July
2002, http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,751220,00.html.

Rai, P K; 2015, Environmental Issues and Sustainable Development of North East India,
Lambert

Redclifft, M; (2005), Sustainable Development (1987–2005): An Oxymoron Comes of Age,

Sustainable Development, Sust. Dev. 13, 212–227, Published online 22 July 2005 in Wiley
InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/sd.281.
Rees W., 1998, Understanding sustainable development, In Sustainable Development and the
Future of Cities, Hamm B, Muttagi P (eds), Intermediate Technology: London; 19–42.

Roseland M., 1998, Towards Sustainable Communities: Resources for Citizens and their
Governments, New Society: Gabriola Island, Canada.

Sachdeva, G; India's Northeast Rejuvenating a Conflict-riven Economy,

https://www.satp.org/satporgtp/publication/faultlines/volume6/Fault6-Gsach-F.htm, accessed on
15/09/2019.

Sachdeva G, The Economy of the Northeast: Policy, Present Conditions and Future Possibilities,
New Delhi: Konark Publishers, 2000.

Schumacher E., 1973, Small Is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered. Abacus: London.

Workshop on Urban Sustainability (National Science Foundation), 2000, Towards a

Comprehensive Geographical Perspective on Urban Sustainability. Rutgers University: NJ.

Schmidheiny S, 1992. Changing Course: a Global Business Perspective on Development and the
Environment. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Singh, N. S, (2006), INTEGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT IN NORTH-EAST INDIA: AN

ASSESSMENT, The Indian Journal of Political Science, APR.- JUNE, Vol. 67, No. 2, pp. 329-
342

https://www.thehindu.com/business/ONGC-finds-uranium-reserve-in-
Assam/article16892025.ece, aacessed on 25/9/2019.

Thomas, C. Joshua, etc., (eds.), 2001, Constraints on Development of Manipur, New Delhi.

Trussart S, Messier D, Roquet V, Aki S. 2002. Hydropower projects: A review of most effective
mitigation measures. Energy Policy 30(14):1251–1259.

United Nations, 2001a, Sustainable development of tourism, Report of the Secretary-General.

E/CN.17/2001/PC/21. United Nations, New York.

UNDP, 2002, Human Development Report 2002: Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented

World, UNDP: New York.

UNESCO: http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/in

www.Vodafone.com, 2009
World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). 1996. The WWF 1995 Group: the Full Story. WWF (UK):
Godalming, UK.