Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Ecology Ethics Economics
Ecology Ethics Economics
Introduction
The rate at which natural resources are used up for the growth of world
economy outstrips the rapid growth of population. While developed countries
of the world use up a large chunk of the world’s natural resources for
supporting a much smaller population, population pressure is the bane of the
developing world, albeit the highly restricted per capita demand on resources in
the developing regions of the world. It is important to recognize that generally
larger family size in developing countries is to ensure risk coverage arising out
of extreme poverty. Therefore, a holistic approach, encompassing sustainable
livelihood/development, education and empowerment and family planning
measures, is crucial to finding a solution. Coping with the twin problems of
population and resource depletion has to be viewed in this context.
In any case, increases in world population are projected to continue to occur
overwhelmingly in the developing world. About three-quarters of the 3.2 billion
increase in world population through 2025 is expected to be in the developing
world. About half of the population growth during this period is expected to be
in Asia, with two of the most populous countries being China and India.
Therefore, though I use India as a case study; what is discussed here is largely
also true for whole of the Asian tropics
Food security
Agriculture is an important economic activity for a large population of the
developing world. In India, the “green revolution” is largely confined to a small
section of our rural society and has had positive repercussions in terms of
general self-sufficiency in food production. But this has had its negative
impacts too. First, this energy intensive activity is still confined to a small sector
of our predominantly agricultural society. Vast sections of our rural
communities are left out, leading to wide disparities in access to resources and
income generation arising out of effective use of natural resources using
affordable appropriate technology. More and more farmers have been
marginalized in spite of overall self-sufficiency in food production. This is apart
from the difficulties faced at a national level by many developing countries
including India to have access to non-renewable resources like petro-based
chemical fertilizers and pesticides to sustain the “green revolution” itself in the
face of increasing population pressure and to cope with the larger problems of
environmental degradation caused by excessive and uncontrolled use of water
and chemical subsidies.
A special mention on gender and poverty would be appropriate at this stage.
Traditionally, women have always played a key role in agricultural activities, in
some form or the other. Even through agriculture employs 70 per cent of the
total working population, it employs 84 percent of all economically active
women. The green revolution has had an adverse impact on this vulnerable Ecology,
section of our society (Shiva,1988; Venkateswaran, 1992). From a position of economics and
being a key player in the food production system, she has been marginalized ethics
more and more; from a cultivator to a labourer is the extreme in this
marginalization process.
Within a given household, there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that
women as a group are more vulnerable than men to extremes of poverty and its 209
consequences (World Bank, 1991).
Deforestation
A close relationship between population growth and agricultural land
extension with the latter tied directly to deforestation has been suggested
through a number of cross-country and country studies, not withstanding fuel
wood extraction and logging operations (Billsborrow, 1992). While reducing
population growth could reduce local pressures on the forest and other natural
resources, this relationship is by no means a simple and straightforward one. In
any case, we in India are now left with a little over 10 percent of the total land
area under closed forest cover. Our forests now are largely confined to upland
areas only. The most vulnerable ecosystems which are still under heavy stress
are those in the upland areas – the Himalayas in the North and the North-
Eastern hills, the Aravallis in the west, the Vindhya and Satpura ranges in
Central India and the Eastern and Western Ghats in the South. Increased
stresses in these upland ecosystems have serious consequences not only for
forest cover and biodiversity concerns, but also for the people in the region and
indeed in the sub-continent as a whole. We are very dependent on the health of
our mountain ecosystem network for survival in the lowland plains. At a local
level, the worst affected are the more vulnerable sections of the society,
including women who have to work harder to collect their basic needs of fodder
and fuelwood. This is apart from the oft-quoted global consequences of climate
change arising out of deforestation.
Social disruptions
The migratory patterns discussed earlier, rural to urban, rural to rural and
circulatory, may have serious social consequences, depending on a given
situation. The concentration of population in urban centres has already choked
the natural ability of urban environments to absorb the wastes and emissions
from human activities. This in turn has led to a variety of environmental health
hazards. Rural to rural circulatory migration, when it is from resource depleted
regions to richer areas, can accelerate the process of environmental
degradation. A classic example of this is the pressure on the rich forest
resources in the north-eastern part of the country. Shifting agriculture which at
one time in the recent past was sustainable because of a longer cycle of 20 years
or more has drastically come down to less than five years, partly because of
large-scale exploitation of forest resources by the industrial humans and the
consequent land degradation caused by it (Case 1). Increase in population
International Case 1. Shifting agriculture (jhum) in North-Eastern India and social disruption
Journal of Social (from Ramakrishnan, 1992b)
Economics North-Eastern India has over 100 different tribes, linguistically and culturally distinct from one
another; the tribes often change over very short distances, a few kilometers in some cases.
25,2/3/4 Shifting agriculture, or jhum as the tribals call it, is the major economic activity. This highly
organized agroecosystem was based on empirical knowledge accumulated through centuries and
210 was in harmony with the environment as long as the jhum cycle (the fallow length intervening
between two successive croppings) was long enough to allow the forest and the soil fertility lost
during the cropping phase to recover.
Supplementing the jhum system is the valley system of wet rice cultivation and home gardens.
The valley system is sustainable on a regular basis year after year because the wash-out from the
hill slopes provides the needed soil fertility for rice cropping without any external inputs. Home
gardens extensively found in the region have economically valuable trees, shrubs, herbs and
vines and form a compact multi-storied system of fruit crops, vegetables, medicinal plants and
many cash crops; the system in its structure and function imitates a natural forest ecosystem.
The number of species in a small area of less than a hectare may be 30 or 40; it therefore
represents a highly intensive system of farming in harmony with the environment.
Linked on this land-use are the animal husbandry systems centred traditionally around pigs
and poultry. The advantage here is primarily that they are detritus-based or based on the
recycling of food from the agroecosystem unfit for human consumption.
Increased human population pressure and decline in land area resulting from extensive
deforestation for timber for use for industrial man and jhum has brought down the jhum cycle to
four to five years or less. Where population densities are high, as around urban centres, burning
of slash is dispensed with, leading to rotational/sedentary systems of agriculture. These are often
below subsistence level, though the attempt is to maximize output under rapidly depleting soil
fertility. Inappropriate animal husbandry practices introduced into the area, such as goat or cattle
husbandry, could lead to rapid site deterioration through indiscriminate grazing/browsing and
fodder removal, as has happened elsewhere in the Himalayas. The serious social disruption
caused demands an integrated approach to managing the forest-human interface.
pressure from within is only one of the factors contributing to the break-down
of the shifting agriculture system caused by the rapid shortening of the cycle.
Indeed, large areas in this high rainfall region have been desertified largely
because of pressure originating from outside the region. In the tribal areas of the
North-East, the adverse consequences are both ecological, social and economic
(Ramakrishnan, 1992b).
Agroecosystem redevelopment
Biodiversity concerns in agriculture and sustainable agroecosystem
development are linked with each other in a variety of ways. Yet, talking of
agriculture, one often visualizes a monotonous monocropping system totally
devoid of biodiversity. This perception is largely due to energy-intensive modern
agriculture that we often see all around us. However, there exist in the tropics a
wide range of complex agroecosystem types with biodiversity comparable to
that of the natural ecosystems and indeed occasionally exceeding it. This
biodiversity contributes in a variety of ways towards ecosystem function such as
production, decomposition, nutrient cycling dynamics and thus towards
stability and resilience. Specific examples of these agroecosystem types
(Ramakrishnan, 1992b) with varied levels of management ranging from the
casual to high intensity, eventually leading to modern monocropping systems,
are as indicated in Figure 1 (Swift et al., 1994). The traditional agroecosystem
type available in north-east India has most of the agroecosystem types ranging
from casually managed through low intensity management to middle intensity
management systems. The shifting agriculture, home garden, valley land wet
rice cultivation, rotational fallow and the traditional horticulture and cash crop
farming systems, with all the variant types to be found in each one of them
contribute to rich crop biodiversity where a variety of species and cultivars are
handled and conserved by over 100 different tribes of the region.
It is generally acknowledged that biodiversity decreases as habitats change
from forest to traditional agriculture and then on to modern agriculture. While
a variety of models for loss in biodiversity under varied intensities of
management regimes for agriculture are proposed (Figure 1), it seems obvious
that biodiversity decline is sharp somewhere in the area close to the middle
intensity of management (Curve IV). If that be so, it is crucial to have a level of
management that is closer to this critical area for sustaining biodiversity in
agriculture (Swift et al., 1994). The sustainable development of agriculture
suggested for North-East India being in the middle intensity management
range harmonizes biodiversity concerns.
Ecology,
II economics and
Biodiversity
IV
ethics
III
219
I
Landscape mosaic
Compared with a landscape model that is often seen now, where pristine unmanaged ecosystems
are set in a sea of intensive large-scale agroecosystems, it may be desirable to have a mosaic of
agroecosystem types derived through all the three pathways coexisting with natural ecosystem
types, managed or unmanaged. Maintenance of the overall sustainability of the system requires
the patchwork mosaic that would, albeit inadvertently, be the best plan for biodiversity
conservation in general.
(Case 5) and more specific hypotheses arising out of it are based on this
appreciation (Ramakrishnan et al., 1994a) It is in this context and the context of
the concerns of the developing world as a whole, I consider linking biodiversity
concerns with rehabilitation/ sustainable livelihood issues of traditional
societies in the region becomes crucial. The task ahead is difficult and complex,
but can be handled through a bottom-up approach and involving local
communities right through conceptualization, planning and implementation of
a location-specific strategy.
References
Billsborrow, R.E. (1992), “Population development and deforestation”, in UN Expert Group
Meeting on Population, Environment and Development, New York, NY, January (mimeo).
Brookfield, H. and Padoch, C. (1994), “Appreciating biodiversity: a look at the dynamism and
diversity of indigenous farming practices”, Environment, Vol. 36, pp. 6-11 and 37-45.
Chacon, J.C. and Gliessman, S.R. (1982), “Use of the ‘non-weed’ concept in traditional tropical
agroecosystems of south-eastern Mexico”, Agro-Ecosystems, Vol. 8, pp. 1-10.
Gliessman, S.R. (Ed.) (1989), Agroecology: Researching the Ecological Basis for Sustainable Ecology,
Agriculture. Ecol. Studies, Vol. 78, SpringerVerlag, New York, NY, p. 380.
Kayastha, S.L. (1989), “Sustainability of metropolitan centres in third world countries”, in Singh,
economics and
S.N., Premi, M.K., Bhatia, P.S. and Bose, A. (Eds), Population Transition in India, Vol. 2, BR ethics
Publ. Corp., Delhi, pp. 327-34.
Khiewtam, R and Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1993), “Litter and fine root dynamics of relict sacred grove
forest of Cherrapunji in North-Eastern India”, Forest Ecol. Manage., Vol. 60, pp. 327-44.
Kothyari, B.P., Rao, S., Saxena, K.G., Kumar, T. and Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1991), “Institutional 225
approaches in development and transfer of water harvest technology in the Himalaya”, in
Tskiris, G. (Ed.), Proc. European Conf. On Advances in Water Resources Technology, Athens,
20-2 March, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 673-8.
Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1988), “Successional theory: implications for weed management in shifting
agriculture, mixed cropping and agroforestry systems”, in Altieri, M.A. and Liebman, M.
(Eds), Weed Management in Agroecosystems: Ecological Approaches, CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL, pp. 183-96.
Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1992a), “Tropical forests. Exploitation, conservation and management”,
Impact of Science on Society, Vol. 42 No. 166, pp. 149-62.
Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1992b), Shifting Agriculture and Sustainable Development of North-Eastern
India, UNESCO-MAB Series, Paris, Parthenon Publ., Carnforth, (republished by Oxford
University Press, New Delhi, 1993), p. 424.
Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1994), “The jhum agroecosystem in North-Eastern India: a case study of the
biological management of soils in a shifting agricultural system”, in Woomer, P.L. and Swift ,
M. J. (Eds), The Management of Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility, TSBF & Wiley-Sayce Publ.
Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1995a), “Biodiversity and ecosystem function: the human dimension”, in di
Castri, F. and Younes, T., Biodiversity, Science and Development: Towards a New Partnership,
CAB International, London (in press).
Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1995b), “Resources conservation and management”, in Samad, S., Watanabe,
T. and Kim, S. (Eds), People’s Initiatives for Sustainable Development: Lessons of Experience,
Asia & Pacific Development Centre, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 259-64.
Ramakrishnan, P.S. (1995c), “Sustainable rural development with people’s participation in the
Asian context”, in Samad, S., Watanabe, T. and Kim, S. (Eds), People’s Initiatives for
Sustainable Development: Lessons of Experience, Asia & Pacific Development Centre, Kuala
Lumpur, pp. 412-39.
Ramakrishnan, P.S. Purohit, A.N., Saxena, K.G. and Rao, K.S. (1994b), Himalayan Environment
and Sustainable Development, Diamond Jubilee Publ., Indian Nat. Sci. Acad., New Delhi, p. 84.
Ramakrishnan, P.S., Campbell, J., Demierre, L., Gyi, A., Malhotra, K.C., Mehndiratta, S., Rai, S.N.
and Sashidharan, E.M. (1994a), Ecosystem Rehabilitation of the Rural Landscape in South and
Central Asia: An Analysis of Issues, Special Publication, Hadley, M. (Ed.), UNESCO
(ROSTCA), New Delhi, 29pp.
Samad, S.A., Watanabe, T. and Kim, S. (Eds) (1995), People’s Initiatives for Sustainable Development:
Lessons of Experience, Asian & Pacific Development Centre, Kuala Lumpur, p. 470.
Shiva, V. (1988), Staying Alive: Women Ecology and Survival in India, Kali for Women, New Delhi.
Suryakumaran, C. (1992), Environmental Planning for Development, Centre for Regional
Development Studies, Calombo, Sri Lanka, p. 61.
Swift, M.J., Vandermeer, J., Ramakrishnan, P.S., Anderson, J.M., Ong, C.K. and Hawkins, B. (1994),
“Biodiversity and agroecosystem function”, in Mooney, H.A. et al. (Eds), Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Properties: A Global Perspective, John Wiley (in press).
Venkateswaran S. (1992), Living on the Edge: Women, Environment and De Development,
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES), New Delhi, p. 181.
World Bank, (1991), Gender and Poverty in India, The World Bank, Washington, DC, p. 372.