Part I) Theoretical framework. 4
1.1 The State as a Full Player 4
1.2 The Citizenship regime. 6
1.3 Rescaling of Citizenship. 7
Part II) Literature review.. 9
2.1 The State’s Perspective. 9
2.1.1 India’s Most Ambitious Project Ever 12
2.1.2 Social and Environmental Fragile Equation. 14
2.1.3 Sustainable Development 17
2.1.4 Indian Environmental Policies. 21
2.1.5 Environmental Management 24
2.1.6 Role of the Courts. 26
2.1.7 Conclusion. 27
2.2 Corporate Citizenship. 28
2.2.1 Legislation and Environmental Constraints. 29
2.2.2 Multinationals. 32
2.2.3 Conclusion. 34
2.3 Citizenship and Social Movements. 34
2.3.1 Environmental movements. 36
2.3.2 Charisma and Judicial activism.. 38
2.3.3 ‘New Movements’ 40
2.3.4 The Structure of Political Opportunity. 43
Part III) Some Conclusions. 45
Part IV) Hypotheses and Methodology. 49
4.1 Hypotheses. 50
4.2 Methodology. 52
4.3 Specificity of the Field. 54
V) Calendar 56
VI) Annexes. 56
Bibliography. 56
Introduction
From the previous literature review and the month exploratory fieldwork, it seems that in the present buoyant Indian economic context, non sustainable ways of development are privileged by decision-makers, i.e. politicians, business communities and even by the majority of the population. The general feeling being that only economic growth will pull the country out of poverty, while environmental damages are being considered only as ‘externalities’. In this social and environmental fragile context, the Indian development based on services, heavy industrialization and exports, remains nevertheless unevenly distributed inside the country and notoriously short of infrastructures. As a matter of fact, the will to integrate the globalized economy at any cost leads decision makers to obey market laws more than institutional advice on ecological management. This integration into the global market is being done through a process of deregulation and legal reforms. So enterprises fuelling the economy have to adapt increasingly to a double constraint. Remaining competitive while complying with environmental legislation, which is suffering from major deficiencies in terms of monitoring and enforcement? Some corporate initiatives and projects advocate a partnership between public agencies and private stockholders, while collaborating with international organisations, while strong priority is put on the strengthening of the industrial corridor of development linking Delhi, political and administrative capital, and Mumbai, the business capital. As India is already witnessing the growth of social and territorial inequalities, this project supported by the Japanese cooperation, might further reinforce imbalances between East and West India. Yet, for years, social movements have been attempting to counterbalance power of both the government and the enterprises. In spite of some rare successes, the Indian State has not taken into consideration those movements that suffer from a lack of political structure and remain still marginal. Similarly, the Court that used to monitor environmental decisions at the expense of industrialists seems to have shifted their position to favour economic development. What is thus the future of India’s sustainability? What is the interface between the polity, people and enterprises? What are the implications for their citizenship? What is lacking in its environmental governance? What are the forces behind environmental issues that divide ecology against environment, brown against green agenda, rich against poor, and finally the urban against the peri-urban? The failure to translate the two decades old concept of sustainable development into effective action points to the need for more relevant global, national and local development strategic alliances and policies.
Part one will describe the theoretical framework of public policies and the notion of citizenship. Through the literature review in the second part, we will study how central and state governments are slowly but surely changing their use and understanding of sustainable development. What is then the specific content of the public action in environmental management? After explaining the public policies, we will see how private initiatives are progressively becoming the real area of policy innovation (or regression), sometimes replacing environmental policies. Finally, the diversity of stakeholders (formal, informal, private, public, media, beneficiaries) in attempt to analyze the structures of opportunity that will determine the lines of the research. General conclusions are drawn in part three. Then part four will enable us to come out with some hypothesis. Since the purpose of the research is to contribute scientifically, particular attention will be given to the fieldwork and the methodology.
Part I) Theoretical framework
1.1 The State as a Full Player
Until recently, political systems and State action have been quite neglected in social movement research. As Neveu stated:
“L’analyse des mouvements sociaux a durablement souffert d’un déficit d’attention à la diversité des systèmes politiques. (...) Il n’est donc pas excessif de dater des années 1980 la prise en compte par l’analyse des systèmes politiques et institutionnels” (Neveu 2000: 103).
Even Tarrow’s concept of “political opportunity structure” (1998), does not really consider social representation building as a process and a fight between social groups and the State. Indeed, the very nature of the political system explains the degree of social groups’ access to the system. Thus, if we want to study changes affecting the way social groups and the State interact inside a specific political system, we have to consider the State as a full actor in the game and not just as the target of demands. In McAdam, Tilly and Tarrow note:
“The contentious politics that concerns us is episodic rather than continuous, involves interaction between makers of claims and others, is recognized by those others as bearing on their interests, and brings in government as mediator, target or claimant” (McAdam, Tarrow and Tilly 2000: 25).
Political struggle thus has to be replaced in its whole context (national but also sub-national), and government is seen as a crucial “partner” in the collective actor constitution process (McAdam, Tarrow and Tilly 2000: conclusion). Nevertheless, the focus of the analysis remains on the social group side. Consequently, we proposed to re-direct the focus on the very interaction occurring between citizens and the State at the level of social representation analysis.
However, it can be clearly shown that direct access to the State and to the political process for social groups does not imply that a direct impact will be made on decisions taken. For example, in India, in the field of environment policies, even if the formal structure of public consultation has been opened to a wide range of groups and individuals in the 1994, the reforms taken were generally not influenced by the claims of social groups (Kohli and Menon, 2005). Apart from the “political opportunity structure,” the most important variable seems to be the degree of “porosity” of the dominant discourse towards counter-discourses (Dufour, 2001). Then the research question is not only who has access to the political process but also who is considered in the political process. In other words, social groups express themselves in a public arena, but their discourses must also echo the dominant discourse of government. To engage in dialogue, those involved must share some elements of discussion and both must interact in a shared universe of political discourse (Jobert, 1995). Therefore what is the perception (representations, ideologies, discourses) of the social reality that influences public policies? How are these representations translated into action? There are therefore relations between the global and sectorial, as well as relation between fora of ideas and political arena.
1.2 The Citizenship regime
In the Indian political situation where there is no major institutional crisis in the country, relationships between State and citizens could be described as taking the form of a regime, stable and coherent enough to allow for the reproduction of these relations in time. “The citizen is a constituent member of the sovereignty, synonymous with the people, a member of the civil state, entitled to all its privileges” (Doabia, 2005: 124). The concept of citizenship regime focuses our attention on the relationships existing between the State and society, and, more specifically, the forms of representation that are considered legitimate (Jenson and Phillips, 1996). Here, representation refers to two crucial ideas: the representation of citizens considered legitimate by the State (through their interests) and the representation of citizens by themselves. The concept of citizenship regime is thus an attempt to elucidate the degree of congruence between the representation of interests by the State and the self-representation of citizens. Justice Doabia (2005) connects the idea with an identification with the State and a participation in its functions. A citizen of the country owes certain constitutional duties to the State; especially if there is an identification with the State, then “a citizen is bound to protect the State property” (Doabia, 2005: 124).
Finally, distinction is made between ‘nationality’ and ‘citizenship’ in the regard that nationality is connected to civil rights with reference to international laws; whereas citizenship refers to municipal laws (Doabia, 2005: 125)
These concepts explain how social and environmental problems are conceived at both the level of dominant political actors as well as at the level of social actors, inside or outside the main polity. Variations in the representation and the identification process, induce changes in the civil rights and duties discourses produced by relevant actors. As drastic economic policies have been implemented everywhere in India at the expense of the ecology, the rising participation of collective actors and individuals in the formal consultation structure did not result in increased negotiated solutions between the State and other political actors, nor in the democratization of the policy decision process. Instead, there has been a radicalization of conflicts in India. If some groups tended to be systematically excluded from the federal political scene (Naxalites), new ones have gained visibility in the media and public opinion (Toxics link). Sometimes, they are recognised as interlocutors by governments and are invited to roundtable conferences, on other occasions; they choose a more direct method of protest as the Narmada Bachao movement. In either case, groups do not benefit from their actions in terms of impact on the policy formulation process, which seems to be blocked by some economic and political consensus. Mathieu (2002) suggests that a pragmatic analysis of collective action, considered as a field of activity, demands specific skills as part of universe of practice and autonomous meaning: the space of social movements. Activists, academics and scientists have some ambiguous positions, from compromising to violent rebellion, the whole range is present. In some way their attitude is also reactive to local catastrophes, might it be human and ecological or social. Although this is the common trend in most Indian states, some differences can be noticed. In particular, we will see that Gujarat appears more and more as a special case. Recently, it has become clear that there is a rescaling of citizenship in the country.
1.3 Rescaling of Citizenship
The 1991 economic liberalization has spurred important changes and the polity takes into account several superimposed spatial scales (global, national, state, and local) (Brenner, 2004). Globalization of economic and financial flows makes the control of fundamental economic and social stability. The country is thus stuck in a dependency status that modifies the content and the development of their public policies. Exogenous forces are shaping environmental governance outcomes, especially multinational firms and international agencies. State structures are criticized for the lack of competences and finances. However, public and private actors too are actively shaping outcomes, taking the decision to leverage their cities to better attract global investment flows. While environment remains a green issue (exploitation of natural resources, deforestation, land degradation, and biodiversity loss), states are ‘rescaling’ their internal institutional hierarchies to adjust to economic realities; state territorial power is being rearticulated and reterritorialised (Brenner, 2004). Evolution of stakeholders is manifested in the internationalization of the enterprises, social movements, and the growing importance of international organizations that are attempting to spread and generalize norms drawn up at a transnational level. These economic reforms and political change contributed to the emergence of multilevel governance in India (Mehta et al., 1999), and a rescaling of citizenship (Purcell, 2003). The importance of political leadership, of the state and other organised actors, both local and supra-local must be underscored. Is development being advanced as potential base for citizenship leading to the demise of political contestation seen as destabilizing the current order? In brief, the concept seeks to analyze and interpret in a new way politics and its relations between institutional politics and the non politics. The notion aims also at describing the transformations of ways of governing, from government to governance, that are rules and decisions being defined and put into practice in accordance with public interest, based on participation and negotiation of the various stakeholders (Milbert, 2007: 44)
Will India’s environmental future be determined by the evolution of governance? The term ‘governance’ remains ambiguous and unclear when dealing with development issues (Hufty, 2007). According to the World Bank in 1992, governance would be the way authority is being exercised in a country’s management of economic and social resources. In a report published by the Commission on Global Governance in 1996, governance is the sum of the different ways individuals, public and private institutions manage their common affairs. It is a continuous process of cooperation and negotiation between sometimes contradictory interests. Governance includes official institutions and regimes endowed with executive power, as the informal arrangements made by people and institutions when agreeing on their common interest. Faulks pegs the concept to citizenship:
“Governance refers to the inherent human need to create and maintain social order and to distribute material and cultural resources. Politics, to which citizenship is closely related, is a set of methods and techniques, such as deliberation, compromise, diplomacy, and power sharing, through which the problem of governance can be resolved non-violently” (Faulks, 2000:5).
« Good » governance generally entails transparency, fair treatment, and accountability. Societies that are governed well encourage a sense of social solidarity, which is valuable in problem solving. Given the particular focus of this study, definition of ‘good’ environmental governance entails the integration of environmental with social, political, and economic objectives such that the long term sustainability of ecosystems is preserved (Zarsky, 2001). What is then the State’s perspective? How has it evolved? What are the implications for the corporations? The citizens? How does the State depend on internal and external forces? How does it reconcile growth and sustainability? On what does sustainability of democracy and of the biosphere depend?
Part II) Literature review
2.1 The State’s Perspective
From 1991 on, the Indian governments (central and state) have been driven by one obsession: the absolute necessity to grow. Each reform undertaken ever since was designed to liberalize and privatize in a way or another (Boillot, 2006). Above all, this growth aims at insuring the needs of a vast population of 1,1 billion (OECD, 2005). Politicians knew that in elections, jobs availability matters most. Till now, growth remains the key word of India’s development strategy.
A year later, India signed the principles of the Rio Declaration, committing to a sustainable development, at least in the dominant discourse (United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, 1999). The Supreme Court had endorsed an active environmental leadership. Three options were predominantly discussed: polluter-pays-principle, precautionary and the sustainable development principles, and the international law concerning environment and human rights. In reality, the Supreme Court chose to do a little of each, with a clear priority given to urban issues. But pressed by businesses, Planning Commissions kept on ignoring the conditions of quality and inclusive development (Centre for Development Alternatives, 2008).
In fact, the liberalization policies pushed forward by Manmohan Singh, at that time in charge of the finances portfolio, were crucial in maintaining the dynamic of previous reforms. Foreign direct investments were encouraged, although the State was careful to raise barriers against short term capital flows, until 2006, when those restrictions were adjusted. Public companies opened up to private capital, along with customs duties and taxes on private wealth being reduced. The 1990 bubble economy in United States indirectly favoured the development of new economic and industrial poles, in particular in the IT sector where lack of proper infrastructure were not though impeding. Firms would build their own generators to compensate for the shortfall of the local electricity network. Satellites could link within a nanosecond Indian companies to the ones in the Silicon Valley, without having to rely on the local deficient telephone lines. Since then, India has been an attractive outsourcing centre based on qualified labour (Bourguignon et al. 2007).
At that time, authors suggested that liberalization has domestic environmental effects. Free trade induces positive environmental changes through first structural effects: pollution prevention as opposed to pollution abatement and cleaning-up operations; then scale and technology effects: resource efficiency emphazises resource productivity and clean technology; and finally product effect: production needs to meet the quality standards (Grossman & Krueger, 1991; Veen groot & Nijkamp, 1999). Cynically, the head economist of the World Bank, L. Summers, had declared in 1982 that the economic logic wants that toxic wastes have to be dumped where salaries are lower (Fort, 2007).
Riding the wave, multinational companies (MNCs) started expanding their manufacturing capacity in India. Finally, from 2001 on, special economics zones (SEZs) served as incentive for companies from all over the world and India to invest important amounts (Stiglitz, 2006). At the same time, the country taking advantage of its numerous labour, emerged into the global market, exporting mainly competitive manufactured goods and components made by cheap labour. However finished products and electrical goods still at an early stage of development remain unlikely to be exported substantially for some time (Winters & Yusuf, 2007). At the same time, huge Indian consortiums, sometimes in association with foreign multinational companies (MNCs) have consolidated their niche in the domestic market and even in the international one (Ambani, Birla, Godrej, Larsen&Toudro, Modi, Tata). This economic boom favored the emergence of a consuming middle class of 120 to 220 million people depending on sources (National Council of Applied Economic Research, 2002), that constitute the happy few benefiting from the boom while pulling forward the service sector. FDIs are also linked to a MNCs strategy to an easy access for their products to the local Indian market, by producing locally. In the sector of electronics and automobiles, they are competing with local productions, hence strict regulations. Small enterprises are also playing a role in the industrial fabric, characterized by a strong specialization, and division of labour. Their development lies on communities of cottage industries with specific competences and closely interlinked, founded on the cast system for instance (Cadène, 2007).
From Bharat to India?
In 2005, Manmohan Singh, while receiving his honoris causa doctorate in Oxford, mentioned the positive contributions of governance of the British Raj : State of law, democracy and pluralism, promotion of science and technology, preservation of the cultural legacy and the English language as passport to the modern world. Quoting Rabindaranath Tagore in his Gitanjali introduction: « Today the West has opened to us its doors. Its treasures are within our reach. We will take them and we will give them the gifts from the open shores of the immense humanity of India » (Meyer, 2007:201). He expressed therefore his acute sens of priorities of an emerging India through a new approach free from the colonial past resentment. Jean-Louis Racine argues that India has turned the page of its colonial past to launch an entreprise of repossession of the world, at the threshold of post colonial times (Racine, 2006). India is indeed the fourth largest economy and is rapidly catching up with Japan (HM Treasury, 2006:2). However, with inflation inching towards 8 per cent and Index of Industrial Production (IIP) barely touching 3 per cent, some doubts are raised about the resilience of the Indian economy (Kumar Kundu, 2008). In other words, can economic growth be sustained?
Moreover, exploitation of raw materials and agricultural products is struggling to compete against Western farmings that subsidize expensive and polluting inputs as fertilizers and pesticides, and therefore artificially cheaper. The Indian government needs to subsidize as well, entering in a vicious cycle of subsidies and exports. Money owed to fertilizer companies as arrears of subsidies are estimated of Rs. 8,788 crore (approximately, 4 million US$) (Aiyar, 2007:49). Soils are overexploited, no more fallow, and to diversify their exports, by the production of semi processed products or exports of natural resources (wood, mines), without considering the environmental and social costs of those productions (Rodary et alii, 2003). Besides, those resources are often directly exploited by multinationals, and the profits are not well distributed to the locals. India thanks to its strong domestic industries mostly exploit resources through local enterprises with foreign participation, which does not mean that profits are more evenly distributed.
In August 2007, the Union Agricultural Minister in India stated that the agriculture cannot provide much employment, that development in India cannot be made dependent on agriculture, and that the Indian youth should leave rural areas and seek jobs in cities. Similarly, the United Nations Organization is reported to have opined that agriculture is harming, endangering the environment and biodiversity on the Earth (Bhole, 2008). As a response, the eleventh five-year plan (2007-2012) heralded by the present government envisages a new paradigm of growth, larger and more inclusive, aiming at reducing poverty among all. This plan seeks to boost the agriculture and to invest in needed infrastructures targeting a nine per cent growth (Asian Developement Bank, 2007).
However, in 2008, during the World Sustainable Development Forum in Delhi, the Prime Minister also reiterated his concerns related to sustainable development with climate change, and hoped to encourage activities for sustainable development across the globe. In this context, India’s Eleventh Five-year Plan (2007–12) also articulates strategies in the areas of afforestation, sustainable energy use, flood protection, transportation and financial instruments such as capital debenture funds. But what are the implications of recent trends for the future international competitiveness of Indian industry and services and the likely resulting industrial geography ?
2.1.1 India’s Most Ambitious Project Ever
In July 2007, Shri Kamal Nath, Minister of Commerce and Industry (previous Minister of Environment) and Mr. Akira Amari, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, signed an economic partnership agreement, the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC). According to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, this project aims at setting up US$ 90 billion industrial clusters along a 1483 km long Dedicated Freight Corridor linking Delhi to Mumbai to be commissioned by 2012. Its goals are to double the employment potential in five years (3 million people), to triple the industrial output in five years (67% in the manufacturing / processing industry) and to quadruple exports from the region in five years. The six states through which major transport arteries already pass cover 54 percent of India’ s industrial output, 60 percent of its exports and over 50 percent of its FDI. Presented as a “global manufacturing and trading hub”, the project strategic development is based on four principles (Guha Ray, 2008). First, rather than additional fiscal or financial incentives, insufficient infrastructures in transport and energy will be developed with private players. Then brownfield areas will be chosen for regional development where developmental activities have already started. Thirdly, it will develop agro-processing zones and skill development centers to generate local employment; and fourthly only existing large industrial clusters around cities will be considered. The presumed economic growth will positively influence employment of around 180 million people (Singh, CII, 2007). Such strategy needs to be accompanied by vigorous top down administrative authorities, notified investment agreements with foreign parties (Japan Bank for International Cooperation) and international agencies (World Bank and Asian Development Bank), with a deliberate focus on exports and return on investments.
At the same time, the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-2012) has identified inadequate raw material bases, low capacities and outmoded technologies of productions, constraints faced by small units in complying with rigorous environmental standards, shortage of skilled and semi-skilled workforce, inability of the industry to meet international requirements of quantity and variety; and inadequate transport infrastructures (Indian Economic Survey 2007-2008). The Infrastructure Development Corporation, the leading Indian public private developer envisages tackling these problems with the objective of ensuring environmental conservation but without impeding any development imperatives (IL&FS, 2007)
2.1.2 Social and Environmental Fragile Equation
Nevertheless, sixty years of development brought ill-planned urbanization, extensive industrialization and agriculture, and gigantic projects like dams that led to an ecological crisis. Half of the forest is lost, water is scarce and unhealthy, land became eroded, million of people are still poor, homeless and without resources. Three Indian cities are among the most polluted in the world (New Delhi, Mumbai, Kalkota). Vegetable contain pathogenes and animal diversity is under threat. So India’s high population density, extreme climate and economic dependence on its natural resource base make environmental sustainability critical in maintaining its development path. The 2008 Goldman Sachs report on India even warns against a complete collapse of the civilization due to total depletion of natural resources as in the case of the Easter Island (Diamond, 2004).
As documented the Stern Review (2008) environmental degradation indeed affects the economy in several ways. The impact would come from declining agricultural area and productivity due to soil erosion; reduced labour productivity from poor urban air quality, and the threat of toxic and chemical waste in the environment, among others (World Bank, 2006). For instance, in the power sector, India plans to add some 70,000 MW in the next five years. The dominant source of power will be coal, which accounts for some 60% of power generation. Coal is infamous for its significant environmental effects, including gaseous emissions, high ash content, problems with disposal of ash, and its large emissions of carbon-dioxide. Finally, the World Bank estimates that small and medium enterprises account for 70% of total industrial pollution, and are a major source of environmental degradation.
So what factors have brought such environmental impediments on economic growth?
First of all, growth measured by the GDP indicator, that is the volume of of goods and quantity of services consumed, do not take into account defensive spendings generated to fix environmental damages. On the contrary, the sale of natural resources even contributes to GDP growth (Gadrey&Jany-Catrice, 2005) and impact on the environment is considered as a mere negative side effect.
Secondly, the interventions of the State, albeit positive for the production, have had harmful consequences on the environment. For instance, subsidies of scarce resources led to their over exploitation: water, farming lands, forests, kerosene (Audinet, 2006). Another case, in Ranikhet north in the Himalayas can be interpreted in two ways. Roads were built in the 1980s in order to improve access to rural villages. It was supposed to improve living standards thanks to horticulture and tourism. But the new roads had merely helped the organized and illegal decimation of the forest areas, with the transport of the timber made easier through these new roads (Subramanian, 2004).
Thirdly, there is still some belief in the Environmental Kuznets Curve paradigm which states a relation between quality of environment degradation and capita income increase (Singh & Shishodia, 2007). The statement is applicable to some extent to the Indian middle and upper class that start seeking refuge in industrial havens, townships or even in gated communities (Milbert’s presentation, EADI 2008) with a conception of the environment as a lifestyle. But this trend does not inflect the structural problems of environmental exploitation. On the contrary, the merging of a consumer society might worsen the crisis of land demand, export-led industrialization, and heavy air and road traffic. At least, one can mention greater public awareness of the importance of environmental sustainability but that rarely led to any collective action in achieving sustainability (Prajapati, interview, January 2008).
Fourthly, in spite of a separate ministry for environment and forests; and state and local pollution control boards; regulatory bodies did not have the requisite capacity, as using credible threats whereas policies did not make a greater use of economic incentives as offering perks to those adopting new technology, and fines to those polluting. In case of the environment, the judiciary filled the void of the regulatory bodies that have not been able to properly enforce pollution standards (Divan & Rosencranz, 2005).
Then, bad governance is blamed by several authors. Shankar Jha (2004) blames a predatory State run by corrupt officials who do not care about anything except their own interests. Bribing and corruption are also current practice of corporations, whether foreign or Indian (Gupta & Dahiya, 2007). Kumar Sen (2006) denounces the Indian belief that resources being limited and not sufficient for all, the unique solution remains the taking over. This belief generates corruption of politicians who think that money should serve their interests and those of their relatives first. Corporates coupled with State officials are also blamed for not leaving enough space to independent voices. Media serve articles that interest the urban population and lack transparency especially when dealing with environmental issues (Singh & Singh, 2006).
As a result, environmental consciousness remains limited across the country. Gautier warns that the environment risks being annihilated by the Indians themselves, by their materialism and atavistic indifference called tamas that let politicians “rape and loot” the country (Gautier, 2000: 173); whereas Tharoor (2007) denounces the logic that personal space remains traditionally well kept and tidy, whereas shared public space is not taken care of :
« this attitude is also visible in the lack of civic culture in rural and urban India, which leaves public spaces dirty and garbage-strewn, streets potholed and neglected, civic amenities vandalized or not functioning. The Indian wades through dirt and filth, past open sewers and fly-specked waste, to an immaculate home where he proudly bathes twice a day. An acute consciousness of personal hygiene coexists with an astonishing disregard for public sanitation. » (Tharoor, 2007: 290)
Finally, the problem remains the lack of financing as well as the lack of proper information on ecological issues to the enterprises and the public. The government has tried to create incentive mechanisms through norms of emissions, pollution loads and linked credits, administrative pressure and voluntary measures. In practice, those measures have not encourage companies to spend on environmental protection. Furthermore, good GDP results should not hide the need to improve public finances. The fiscal deficit of the central government and of the states has been around ten per cent of the GDP that is an estimated 1,51,144 Rs crore (US$ 4 billion) (Government of India, 2007). This lack of public funds create numerous hassles in infrastructures, social services and environment.
All in all, the political commitment to a sustainable environment is still lukewarm, probably more committed in speech than in action. Ecology does not seem to be a priority, even if environmental issues are often linked to social justice, peace and democracy. Besides significant segments of the population have more pressing priorities. Food security, employment and mere survival set the priorities, as much as maintaining peace, inside as outside the country (Adve, 2007).
Moreover, reforms launched by Manmohan Singh were not commited to develop social opportunities (Sen, 2003). Opening-up to the world and increase of GDP did not produced the expected trickle down effects. In spite of progress in the consumer society, development has enhanced inequalities among the population of which 10 et 20 % is under the poverty line[1] (Assayag, 2005). Per capita income gains might have risen from US$1'178 in 1980 to US$3'051 in 2000 (World Bank), and India ranked 37.8 in the Gini index, that is the ten percent of the population is consuming a mere 3.5% of the wealth (Landy, 2002). Economic growth perspectives and consuming potentials constitute the objectives of a society that does not leave much room to demanding social movements. In fact, India desperately needs growth to fight against poverty and room for maneuver is little. It can hardly afford to absorb negative effects of the growth, and here lays a ‘lethal’ problem as stated by Sunita Narain (2006). Stiglitz warns that such growth, even if it lasts, will not be sustainable, and the majority of the people might live in worse conditions than before (Stiglitz, 2006: 61).
2.1.3 Sustainable Development
The Brundtland Commission (1987) defined it as a combination of three interrelated constituent parts: the economy, the society and the environment. This multidisciplinary aspect covered by sustainable development is expressed in the principle of precaution. This principle, first mentioned at an international level in 1972 at the Stockholm conference on human environment was finally defined in the Declaration of Rio in 1992:
“so as to protect the environment, measures of precautions must be largely implemented by States according to their capacities. In case of damages severe or irreversible, the absence of scientific absolute certainty should not serve as pretexte to postpone the adoption of effective measures aiming at preventing the degradation of the environment.”[2]
The economist Herman Daly (2004) insists on three intrinsic conditions to sustainable development. First of all, the use of renewable resources should be based on the ecosystem’s capacity to regenerate them, as in case of forests. Then, the consumption rate of non renewable resources should not exceed the rate of substitution by renewable resources, as carbon monoxide replaced by methane. Finally, the rate of pollutant emission should not exceed the ecosystem’s capacity to absorb it, as the greenhouse gas and the set off of global warming (GIEC, 2007).[3] Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva (1998) insist on the fact that the problem lies in the production and consumption schemes of industrial countries. Many ecologists have indeed stressed the statu quo that shapes relations between developed and developing countries embedded in a system of world production and consumption. The Mate report (2001) raises the issue of economic, financial and technological substitution to natural inherited resources. The term ‘strong sustainability’ means that certain damages are irreversible and cannot be compensated, as global warming. Economic activities should be subordinated to nature regenertion capacities and assimilation of wastes. A way of assessing the impact of human consumption is provided by the ‘ecological footprint’. This kind of accounting system measures the quantity of productive land that requires an economy to produce the resources it needs and to assimilate its wastes. Under the pressure of globalization, embodied by institutions and international companies, sustainable development has more integrated the local territorial dimension. But seeking aid from the North puts countries under economic constraints (Mancebo, 2006).
Contemporary discourses in India hint what realities have to be taken into consideration when dealing with such an adaptable concept as sustainable development. A report by the Integrated Research and Action for Development (Parikh, 2004) states that the pressures on environment have to be curtailed by reducing population pressures, increasing literacy, environmental awareness drives and poverty alleviation programmes. Poor are victims of environmental degradation but infrastructure and living conditions do not keep pace with population increase. The report does not mention the change in consumption patterns of the growing middle class though. Garg, Shukla & Kapshe (2007) insist on improving adaptive capacities of communities and the system in its technological, institutional, economic and political variables. The poor have to be turned into agents for environmental restoration by involving them in say forest management, waste management, recycling and so on in manners that create incentives for them to use natural resources in sustainable manner. In reality, human exposure to anthropogenic and natural hazards is strongly correlated to the economic and social status, might it be power supply and energy, air quality, water management, and land, forest, biodiversity (Mawdsley, 2004).
According to PK Chaubey of the Indian Institute of Public Administration, the ‘sustainable development’ worry is new but articulation has been changing, depending upon understanding about the relationship between man and nature in terms of perception and knowledge about population, technology, resources and lifestyle, and later about ecological and environmental processes and about the importance of ecosystem, biodiversity and climatic changes (Chaubey, 2008). Indeed, the sustainable development concept encompasses so many aspects and involves so many stakeholders, that it is no surprise that it has become a catch phrase in development planning and resource management (Dayanandan, 2005). The 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference 2008 focuses on twenty-six different themes, chiefly: government’s role and policies, international and supra-national organisations, corporate strategy and social responsibility, climate change mitigation, industrial ecology, environmental laws and topics like sciences, health, transport, consumption and culture.
The 2008 Delhi Sustainable Development Summit mentioned equity and ethical dimensions of international burden sharing and adaptation policies for sustainable development fundamental changes in the policy-making process (National Plan of Action on Climate Change). The Prime Minister called for common but differentiated objectives in carbon mitigation in order to « ensure an acceptable standard of living for all our people but would choose a sustainable path for development » (DSDS, Singh’s inaugural speech, 2008). Further, he appealed to climate justice and global compact in order to get access to environment friendly technologies, especially in energy, transportation, manufacturing and agriculture:
« Nations of the world will have to engage in the next two years to create a consensus on a new architecture for cooperation that involves both finance and technology support to countries for adaptation » (DSDS, Singh’s inaugural speech, 2008). [4]
Finally, on June 2nd 2008, The Prime Minister, in a speech for the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (Assocham), complained that new burdens and responsibilities are sought to be imposed on developing countries in name of environment and social concerns; and that the global community must therefore take stock of the emerging situation and come forward with forward looking and equitable solutions to these problems. The international community is thought to provide potential leapfrogging, which means technical solutions for environment and for economic development (www.khabrein.info, 3 June 2008). Even if the WTO free trade in environmental goods and services has been disappointing, one of the most proeminent outcomes remains the civil nuclear agreement on the way between United States and India as means of carbon free power generation (India Today, 28.04.08).
All in all, one can perceive through official discourses that India is facing hard choices between infrastructure needs, social and environmental issues (hydro power or nuclear?) and its globalized economy. Yet a constancy of the government’s politic has been to reassure foreign private and public investors (Etienne, 2006). So politicians, academics and corporates do not cross the barriers between employment and ecology that is the core of development though. Their integrated approach conceives the environment as an integrated space within development (Sawhney, 2004). Official consensus remains that effective sustainable development must be an interactive, intersectoral, participatory and adaptive process in its designing and implementation. Legal, technical, financial and institutional measures should support its framework. We will therefore examine the coherence of this framework and whether it could actually support such heralded sustainable development process (Part 2.2 and 2.3).
2.1.4 Indian Environmental Policies
The first awakening to environmental issues came in 1972, as the Indian State created the National Commitee of Environmental Planning and Coordination (NCEPC) jointly with the Forest Department. Ever since, numerous acts were amended, as the law protecting wildlife in 1972 (Wildlife Protection Act) ; waters (Prevention and Control of Pollution Act) in 1974, forests in 1980, air in 1981. The Water and the Air Act laid down standards of emissions, without considering pollutants (mostly solid wastes and lagooned wastewater). The growing use of toxic pesticides led to serious contamination of water species eaten by villagers[5]. A further more comprehensive legislation was enacted in the 1980s due to non governmental organizations pressure.
In 1986, the State established a more formal institution, the Ministry of Environment of Forests, in charge of planning, promotion and implementation of environmental programs. Its mandate is wide-ranging, including the conservation and inventory of the flora, the fauna, forests and wild life; the prevention and control of pollution, deforestation and regeneration of damaged areas. In order to raise awareness, the Ministry tries to train and inform citizens. This represents a way of promoting public participation to programs and possible recruitment. The work is done in collaboration with agencies and independent institutions, as the Centre for Science and Environment in Delhi, that oversee the implementation. Nevertheless, in spite of a complete and restrictive legal framework set in 1986 (Environment Protection Act), implementing state agencies had not been up to the task.
In 1989, the Ministry of Environment and Forests has notified the Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, then amended in 2000 and 2003 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. These rules regulate the collection, storage, transportation, treatment, disposal, export, import and recycling of hazardous wastes listed in the Schedules annexed to these rules. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India has provided a scheme called ‘Corporate Responsibility for Environment Protection’ (CREP) for registration of recyclers and re-processors for hazardous waste recycling and reprocessing units in order to ensure that such wastes are recycled in an environmentally sound manner. The recycling and reprocessing of hazardous wastes is allowed to be carried out only by the units registered as recyclers with the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and having environmentally sound management facilities for recycling such wastes.
Further in 1992, the Narasimha Rao administration officially defined a green strategy of nature conservation (National Conservation Strategy and Policy Statement) ; along with directives to mitigate pollution (Policy Statement on the Abatement of Pollution); and the Public Liability Insurance Act en 1991. Even since the nineties, under the WTO regime of environmental provisions, India had to produce certifications in order to export its products. For instance, the ‘ECO-MARK’ scheme was launched by the Ministry in 1991 for labelling of environment-friendly consumer products which met certain environmental criteria along with quality requirements of the Bureau of India Standards (BIS). The scheme was reviewed in 2007 with a view to introduce necessary changes required for its promotion as also to bring it in the line with the procedures in other countries. So some Indian exporting companies have subscribed to the ISO 14000 certification.[6] The Ministry then consulted an Inter-Ministerial Consultative Group with a view to developing common position for multilateral negotiations in respect of several issues at the interface of ‘Trade and Environment” (Government of India, 2007).
Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) are studies undertaken in order to assess the effect on a specific environment of the introduction of any new factor that may upset the current ecological balance (UNISDR, 2006). In India, the 1994 EIA Notification has been amended eleven times. Activists complained that mandatory environmental clearances have become a mere “no increase in pollution load” (Menon & Kohli, 2007). Furthermore, in January 2001, the Ministry of Environment and Forest proposed to amend the existing EIA to drop the requirement to hold public hearings in the case of small scale industries, along with mining projects up to twenty five hectares, widening and strengthening of highways, and modernization of existing irrigation projects. The official argument was that the environment impacts of such projects could be assessed on the basis of information provided by the project proponents to the Ministry (Parekh, 2001). Nevertheless, EIA is a pre-requisite for project funding from international financial institutions; even if the assessments are conducted within limitations of time, manpower, financial resources and data (Auluck, 2007).
Finally, in 2004 a National Environment Policy (NEP) formulated by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) along with the Parliament and Industry Associations was considered to mainstream environmental concerns in all development activities and sectoral policies:
« The Ministry continued its activities aimed at creating a comprehensive legal and institutional infrastructure for safeguarding the environment. These include framing of rules, notification on delegation of powers, etc., as amended from time to time to make them effective » (Government of India, 2007:322).
At the same time, the policy again encouraged partnerships of different stakeholders i.e. public agencies, local communities, the investment community and international development partners, in harnessing the respective resources and strengths for environmental management (Prasad, 2007). This document provoked a large number of protests from environmental groups across the country as the NEP made the environment “subservient to wealth generating sectors” (Kothari, 2005: 5). Besides, although local communities’ lives are most intertwined with the health of the environment, they were not consulted. Consequently, in 2006, the MoEF amended the policy, which was again posted on the website for accession by all concerned.
Finally, in 2007, new standards for industrial effluents were laid down and a policy statement for abatement of pollution emphasized on preventive aspects of pollution abatement and promotion of technologies to reduce the pollution. Aggravated ‘brown’ environmental issues arising from industrialization and urbanization (industrial wastes, water, and air) were also matters of concern raised by foreign governments. Actually, in the DMIC project, setting up high standards of environmental protection mechanism was one of the requirements of the Japanese business representatives before investments (METI, 2007). The Indian governement promised financial assistance for establishment and running of waste minimisation circles in clusters of small scale industries. In this ‘win-win’ situation, the government encourages voluntary participation of entrepreneurs (CREP Report 2006). According to the India 2007 report, a total of 118 waste minimisation circles in 41 industrial sectors have been set up in clusters of small scale industries to facilitate capacity building in the area of cleaner production (Government of India, 2007).
2.1.5 Environmental Management
Traditional command and control (CAC) policies linked to an ‘end-of-pipe’ approach have been deficient, even if correctly implemented. The reason is that standards of emissions are set by the MoEF for different industrial activities, but independently of the volume of pollution generation. Small scale units (39 percent of all industrial units)[7] equipped with an end-of-pipe pollution control device could perfectly meet the environmental standards, emitting little but constantly. Moreover, the legislation remains incomplete as the Water Act for instance covers industrial effluents, not domestic and municipal which yet constitute ninety percent of the watershed (Sawhney, 2004). The problem is that source-specific effluent standards have not been set in accordance with desired ambient standards. The standards are uniform for a given source, irrespective of the assimilative capacity of the surrounding environment. This means that even if hundred per cent compliance is achieved by industries in an industrial area, ambient quality may still be poorer than the required quality.
In India, responsibilities for management of the environment are divided between the central and the state governments. The Central Pollution Control Board and the Ministry of Environment of the central government make policy, set standards and monitor their implementation at a national level. The State Pollution Control Boards, which operates administratively under the state governments, are entrusted with the job of implementing the standards laid down. Theses boards carry out the regular monitoring of industries. These state agencies have wide powers to penalize offenders, including ordering the closure of manufacturing units.
However, by tradition, Pollution Control Boards adopt a soft attitude towards polluting industries by simply issuing warnings. The result is that these laws are practiced more in violation than conformity and a large number of industries operate without proper safety and pollution control measures (Curmally, 2002). Besides, poor implementation of the ‘polluter/payer’ mechanism failed to internalize the cost of waste disposal into the cost of the product in the engineering, financing and contractual processes (market-based regime). As a matter of fact, pure CAC regimes are often as costly as market-based abatement regimes, and collecting fines as difficult in practice.
Finally, the Center for Science and Environment reveals that the number of small scale industries outnumbers the capacity of the Pollution Control Board staff, who is by the way insufficiently trained, underpaid and therefore easily corruptible. Large industries are actually easier to monitor. Since there is no ‘carrot and stick’ state policies, a lack of incentive, no subsidies for clean technology and no reward system, the only regulatory pressure might come from the consumers. But for Indians, the price counts more than the quality of the product or its environmental impact. Real pressure may only come from abroad, when Indian products have to meet environmental standards in order to enter foreign markets. Industries therefore will seek a better image to show to foreign consumers, as in the case of chlorine free paper (Zeya Hazra, CSE, 2008).
2.1.6 Role of the Courts
In fact, standards have been implemented when courts give priority to environmental cases. Some of the High Courts in the states have a special ‘green bench’ to deal exclusively with these matters. In 1993, the Supreme Court of India issued directions for the removal of about five hundred heavily polluting small-scale industrial units in Ferozabad near Agra, their fumes affecting the Taj Mahal. Polluting industries were supposed to be moved to other locations and have anti pollution devices in each unit installed. But this Court order led to a major protest organized in Ferozabad by the small-scale units owners. The Delhi Grand Trunk highway was blocked creating a huge traffic jam. Protesters wanted the state government to announce publicly that it would appeal against this order, and postpone compliance. Local officials, the district magistrate and the superintendent of police influenced by local interests did not want to enforce the law going against the Court orders. They were swiftly replaced by the chief secretary by two officials from Agra and police were arranged for reinforcements (Subramanian, 2004:269). This case shows the delicate balance of green issues against social ones. It is not sure that environmental decisions are understood by the people and might even affect them in the short run.
Some positive experiences though, as when the ‘green’ judge of the Supreme Court, Kuldip Singh supported the decision of Surat municipal commissioner to clean up the city after the plague. Illegal constructions were demolished; sewerage and rubbish collection were improved; and especially governance was enhanced at all level, including a window for citizens’ complaints (Shah, 1997).
Nevertheless, Rajamani (2007) objects to the growing role of the courts in monitoring issues. First of all, the Central pollution control board has to implement court’s orders and cannot perform its regular tasks properly. Social Watch India (2007: 124) reports that there are 33,635 pending cases at the Supreme Court. They also report an abuse of public interest litigations that actually serve private interests and delay courts’ actions. But as ecologists have to face weak anti pollution measures and their implementation done by easily bribed officers, they have faith in the remedial mechanism of the judiciary system; that is courts insuring proper regulatory process. Nevertheless, judicial intervention when effective remains only reactive in diluting regimes, instead of upholding processes that will bring sustainable development (Alvares, meeting February 2008). For instance, compressed natural gas (CNG) made mandatory for buses and rickshaws in several Indian cities has been a success, but the growing number of cars has raised levels of air pollution as before the introduction of CNG (Rajamani, interview February 2008).
Or in most cases of illegal dumping of toxic wastes and related health hazards, courts could only fix the amount of financiary compensation, but could not implement a solution to clear the contaminated areas. Dioxins from the Bhopal tragedy in 1987 are still awaiting to be incinerated (Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti, 2007). Finally, the Human Rights Law Network complains that courts are not knowledgeable enough in monitoring environmental issues. Either the appointed judges, who are not from the afflicted area, are not environmental sensitive and yield to development pressures; or the nominated expert committee is not competent and made up of retired officials (HRLN, 2008).
2.1.7 Conclusion
Governance of sustainable development is entangled in daily socio economic problems: environmental crisis, soaring demography, growing shortage of water, land, fuel resources and control of subsistence crops with corollary of violence, fundamentalism and oppressions (Tellenne & Moreau, 2005). Sunita Narain (2006) insists on the needs for new thinking on global sustainable development issues. Solutions to problems are not those elaborated and tried in the developed countries, although there is a link with the South rich in resources and biodiversity. As long as no global institutions are responsible for a real policy of sustainable development, southern countries will depend on controversial environmental policies coming from WTO, FAO or multinationals. Genuine environmental governance would need funds that are missing in India (Biermann & Dingwerth, 2004). Therefore dialogue is not among converted anymore, but among global industrialists and investors who agree to act if it turns out profitable (Hirway, interview January 2008). Nevertheless, climat impacts – temperatures, rains, rising of sea level and other extreme natural events – prove the necessity for India to develop adapted responses to those changes. What contributions can be expected from the corporate sector? Corporate citizenship envisages a mitigation of social and environmental strains performed through linkages between commercial affairs, international institutions, and political decisions.
2.2 Corporate Citizenship
In May 2008, six Indian companies, namely Mahindra & Mahindra (vehicles), Tata Tea, Apollo Tyres Ltd, NTPC (coal and hydro power), ONGC (oil and gas) and MSPL (mining and wind power) - were the recipients of the Businessworld Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) - SouthAsia Enterprise Development Facility (SEDF) Corporate Social Responsibility Award 2007. Finance Minister P. Chidambaram exhorted the captains of the industry to desist from non-competitive behaviour and cartelisation adding that industry owes responsibililty to the larger community while growth can be sustained by good governance and good politics. Moreover, inclusive growth could only be promoted by having a high sense of collective conscience (Chatterjee, 2008). Harshpati Singhania, FICCI senior vice president, added:
“The business decision-making, in a growing number of companies is now linked to ethical values, compliance with legal requirements, and with respect for people, communities and environment. Many companies are realizing that aligning CSR activities closely with business objectives is good for their business” (Chatterjee, International Business Times, 21 May 2008)
What is intended in the concept? And how is it put into practice?
Actually, since about 1995, social responsibility is officially put into practice and discussed among business, industrial associations, non governmental organizations (NGOs) and the government. In response to the international and national pressure, Indian financial institutions, corporations, investors, business associations and entrepreneurs have developed strategies to combine the three ‘P’s that are: persons, planete and profit to a quest of sustainability and responsibility. Firstly, money has a smell and the capital a reputation. Investors should know about the practices of the companies which reduce risk and increase profit. Profits must be optimized and no longer maximized. Finally, companies bet on good governance: responsibility, transparency, social and environmental investments in order to reassure employees, consumers and above all shareholders and governments (www.globalcompactindia.com, June 2007). These companies witnessed the success of their initiatives because they merged philanthropy with active corporate involvement. However, it is not uncommon for some company leaders to donate a few million rupees to a random cause feel satisfied that they have made a positive impact. May be it will alleviate someone’s life, but active participation by a company in a social project can bolster the impact on the community and fulfill a wide range of business objectives. One of them, Tata, ninety-one companies active in seven sectors, created four cities providing lodging and basic services to their employees and family. In Jamshedpur (Bihar), steel industrial town, thirty million US dollars per year are devoted to health and education (State of the Planet, 2006: 216). Similarly, in the environment sector, World Wide Fund India works owing to contributions that Indian and foreign companies deduct from taxes (wwfindia.org, 27 June 2007). Since 2000, the Centre for Social Markets (CSM), NGO based in Inde and in United Kingdom wants to promote the three ‘P’ as well as socially responsible investments in small and middle size Indian enterprises (csmworld.org, 6 June 2007).
On the other hand, Milton Friedman argues that while corporations are good for society they should never try to do good for society unless it is in the interests of their shareholders to do so. The moral imperative of corporations is to make as much money for their shareholders as possible. To pursue social and environmental goals at the expense of profitability would be immoral. It can only be justified if so-called socially responsible actions are in the interests of shareholders; in other words if there is a business case. By implication, therefore, all corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy statements can only be justified if they are hypocritical 'greenwash' (quoted in Bakan, 2004:61). Then is CSR a mere complement of the labour and environmental legislation?
2.2.1 Legislation and Environmental Constraints
Until 1991, the large industry was governed by an elaborate licensing procedure as the government encouraged the small-scale sector, which just needed formal registration. India having a complex bureaucratic system, industries had to report to several governmental agencies, each of them requiring regular periodic statements. Small scale industries which represent 39 per cent of the industrial production (2003-04) employing 28 million workers (Government of India, 2007) fall outside the ambit of many government agencies, as the Factories Inspectorate which imposes specific safety standards. It is probably the reason why the small units stay small and growth takes the form of the setting up of a new firm with an overall value of equipment small enough to qualify as small-scale industry (Erkman, 2003).
According to Hettige et al. (1996), India has adopted standards industrial pollution control similar to developed countries. Yet the government will have to be more attentive to the growing involvement of the private sector on social and environmental issues. Rapid industrialization, activities carried out by companies and the legislation represent challenges that companies still consider as externalities. External costs that should be paid by the communities living around the industrial sites, instead of being recorded as ‘bearable limits’ and ‘acceptable costs’ linked to development. 40.64 per cent of Indian industries are actually complaining of environmental regulatory constraints (Wei, 2000). As in the case of toxic waste treatment, costs of ecological rehabilitation are felt to be the responsibility of the State, without being obstacles to growth and progress (Sheth, 2004).
Another obstacle that faces enterprises is the complexity and variability of legal frameworks regulating the establishment and the management of businesses. The integration in the global market is being done through a process of deregulation and legal reforms. They deal with the conditions the State manages international exchanges: customs taxes, conditions to FDIs, taxes on foreign companies and so on. Reforms deal with all of enterprises of the organized sector: access to land, urbanism regulations, access to bank products, corporate law, labour law, environmental protection law, and tax law. Often advantageous to foreign companies, those reforms nevertheless imply an additional cost and new practices. Corporate law which is far from being similar over the world; is more contractual between the State and companies. This trend corresponds to an extension of the Anglo Saxon law mainly, leading to a rise of consulting law firms indispensable to the global market. Large companies also have a better negotiation power, and can lay down legal framework that suits them while choosing to which juridiction to subject (Cadène, 2007: 66).
According to Subramania (2004) no department or agency sees itself as a part of the overall system, one of whose tasks is to facilitate the implementation of a project in the national interest. He mentions his experience in clearances for power projects. There are countless agencies that need to ‘bless’ a project. At central level, these are the Central Electricity Authority, power ministry, environment ministry, finance ministry, coal ministry, and railway ministry. Others such as the Central Bureau of Investigation would come in. At the state level too, there are a number of agencies right down to the local district authorities. When the project promoter is one of the domestic public sector agencies, these clearances, including the environmental one, could be taken for granted as routine. Time consuming but the approvals would come. However, when a private investor, Indian or foreign enters the scene, the whole process turns into a ‘circus’. Each of these important agencies mentioned above thinks that it can hold the country to ransom. The problem is further aggravated when a tripartite agreement is required. According to a World Bank survey, 55 per cent of the Indian firms state that they regularly make payments to get things done (Batra et al., 2003).
Indian companies along with the government have made some attempts to improve their environmental management, in a sectorial, specific and punctual way. One of the main reasons for seeking certification is also to avoid legal prosecution and being sued for environmental damages. Some Indian exporting companies have even subscribed to the ISO 14000 certification[8]. Another aspect is financial and depends greatly on foreign investments, since the creation of a long term capital requires funds, knowledge and technology. There is also a lack of incentive, since the domestic market is not really in demand for environmental friendly products made by certified companies (Chahoud et al., 2007). The ultimate objective would be to reach an ‘ecological management’, that is to integrate the whole process of production from resources exploitation to waste recycling and reuse by other companies. Ultimately, the implementation of environmental management system (EMS) depends on the internal conditions (management, funds, ethics, will) as well as external conditions (laws, norms, subsidies) in the enterprise. As for India, a development of industrial ecology would be very sensible. As industrial clusters are merging along the west coast, they could take advantage of modern and less polluting industrial approach, instead of following the path of western companies that already went through the different stages of environmental policies without great success. New strategies could combine the various stages in order to achieve industrial ecology, thanks to incentives already existing (Erkman & Ramaswamy, 2003).
As a matter of fact, pressures for corporate social reponsibility in India are stronger on exporting companies involved in world supplies chain. For instance the issue of home labour, sometimes done by children, or sweatshops, has been denounced by the international community for a long time. Those workers were vulnerable and exploited without a genuine will or mean to control their situation. Control remains a hard task since many multinationals are using local manufacturers for their production. Although they are supposed to check on the working condition and environmental standards of their suppliers, they are sometimes overwhelmed by the number of small and middle suppliers, themselves depending on other suppliers. Besides, as they argue, social and environmental norms should be implemented and controled by the State and not the company.
2.2.2 Multinationals
Multinational companies are making decisions on the governance of issues which have global and local impact affecting human rights and the environment. The environmental issue is a case in which private costs may differ from social ones, whether it is the company or the state that covers them. Limited responsibility of companies gives way to environmental abuse, leaving the clearing costs to the state and ecological degradation to the population. Without regulations and social pressure, companies would have no incentive to pay for environmental costs that may outdo the value of production. Often, corruption and bribes come into the picture when companies infringe security or environmental norms (Stiglitz, 2006).
Globally, these decisions also include precautionary approaches to global warming, promotion of genetically modified crops through existing world trade agreements, availability of life-saving drugs to poor countries and pursuit of money laundering (Bakan, 2004). At country level, pre-investment impact analysis increasingly includes considerations of social and environmental issues, even if only from the perspective of the company. Foreign companies settled in India have revealed their committed policies as propaganda. Coca-Cola India for instance presented its civil action to water conservation rewarded by the Indian authorities. The company also claims education, health and charity policies towards communities in Assam and Bihar (www.coca-colaindia.com, June 2007). Coca-Cola had to restore its image after it had to leave the city of Plachimada in Kerala in 2003 under popular pressure accusing it to well water pollution (Shiva, 2005).
Decisions to penetrate the Indian market can be crucial. A MNC needs to be seen as perfoming responsibly and cannot let competitors in. So to what extent should the company pursue its own global way of doing things or adopt local practices, for instance on facilitation payments? On which human rights amongst its own people, its suppliers and contractors and immediate local communities should the company insist? How far should it use its contacts with government ministers and officials to exert influence on social and environmental policies?
As an example, 80 per cent of the pesticide market is dominated by seven transnational companies. Price is being fixed by the international market, according to a maximization of profit logic (Ziegler, 2005). In October 2004, Raghuveera Reddy, Minister of Agriculture numbered 3,000 famers’ suicide in Andhra Pradesh. They owed money to money lenders, forced to borrow to buy companies pesticides and fertilizers (Frontline).
How should it manage a conflict between the interests of a national government from which it has gained its formal licence to operate and an indigenous community where it is operating? In November 2007, the Norvegian government decided to withdraw from Vedanta, a British metal and mining company of Indian origin that allegedly damaged the environment, violated human rights by evicting tribals in the state of Orissa (Hindustan Times, 17 November 2007). All in all, these are governance decisions which are usually not overseen by representative governments. National governments and international representations as the UN do not have effective procedures for monitoring business in respect of human rights and the environment. As in the case of Global Compact, participation, transparency and accountability are voluntary actions. Actually, interest in assuming corporate social and environmental responsibilities may hide bigger stakes contrary to general long term interests.
2.2.3 Conclusion
As we saw, social responsibility is not institutionalized to the extent that it is embedded in business practices. In a society embedded in the notions of casts and fate, the idea of social responsibility is not widespread and seems influenced by foreign doctines (Guptara, 2002). It is rather a social favour left to the discretion of the directors. Corporate social responsibility as a right for the workers is still not on the agenda. Employee’s conditions are left to the employer’s benevolence. Even if international competition and legislation have spurred companies to show more concern for the workers, the environment and quality management, implementation and coercive measures are still lax (Atul & Bimal, 2006). In 2004, only five Indian companies had published reports disclosing information on their social and environmental achievements. A report called « Accountability’s National Corporate Responsibility » published in 2003 a CSR index of fifty countries: India was at the 53rd position; whereas China got the 44th. Position. One may wonder whether innovation, technology and a prevailing corporate ethos came to substitute for the poorly implemented strict national legislation. Besides, CSR holds on to the status quo ‘consumption and exports fuelling growth will help the country reconcile its environment with social and economic developments’. Nevertheless, as Indian optimism about economic growth is celebrated and encouraged, some unpleasant realities have a tendency to be recurrent. Kamdar (2007) calls it a clash between the new India and the traditional ‘Bharat’. This clash is perceived as a potential for finding a third way alternative somehow crystallized around the CSR concept. To what extent do social movements participate in this quest of the third way alternative?
2.3 Citizenship and Social Movements
Paul Wilkinson defines social movement as “a deliberate collective endeavour to promote change that enjoys a minimal degree of organization with conscious volition, normative commitment to the aims or beliefs” (Wilkinson, 1971:27). Johnson adds that if the action is legally permitted and widely accepted as binding in society or part of society, then it is institutionalized action, like petitioning, advocacy, lobbing, voting and fighting legal battles in courts (Johnson, 1966:21). James Scott (1985) and Ramchandra Guha (2000) insist on the notion of resistance involving collective action as an expression of protest. It is not a movement as long as it remains at an individual level and desists from confrontation.
As a matter of fact, Indian social movements are embedded in the social, cultural and political realities of a multiethnic, multilingual and multipolitical system. « Unity in diversity » has characterized India for a long time, founded on relations between ethnic, religious, linguistic or social groups, to which the cast system had provided a frame and codes regulating those human relations. That system has the merit of integrating each individual in the society, assigning a role and a predefined behavior. It is this unity, symbolized by Mohandas Gandhi and civil disobedience that enable the Indian people to acquire its independence in 1947. After the Partition, this independence has also reinforced a feeling of national cohesion which had not been refuted for years.
Recent discourses on the environment, global warming or biodiversity; reappraise the relation between man and nature, although this relation is not new. For Indians, the importance and value of nature has existed ever since the creation. The body is only a type of organization of five elements that compose the environment, this concept of ‘sharira’ is tightly linked to nature and the cosmos (Kakar, 2007). This view shaped people’s understanding of tribals, farmers and mountain people who suppositely live in harmony with nature. Plants and animals are intrinsically sacred and technology should serve the community not enslave it (Visvanathan, 1985). The ecologist Aparna Watve stated recently: “Not just the plantation and animals, even the people have developed a survival strategy. They have their own technology of water harvesting in Jaisalmer and know their responsibility of ecosystem conservation.” (In synch with nature, May 2008). Similarly, the reknown physicist Vandana Shiva came to understand nature when encountering illiterate community women of Uttar Pradesh. The belief is that if empowered, communities would manage resources sustainably, instead of being looted by urban local potentates (Shiva, 2005).
Under the Nehru and Indira Gandhi era, the scientific environmental orthodoxy in place then was focusing on ‘cultural’ agricultural and urban environments. They were clearly distinguished from the ‘natural’ environment of mountains, forests, and deserts. A dichotomy between the ‘artificial’ and ‘natural’ environment was thus created, dichotomy still prevailing thereafter in the segmented conception of nature exploitation (Agarwal, 2001). Visvanathan (1985) actually wrote that Indira Gandhi was concerned about biodiversity more than people displaced when building dams. At that time, the journal ‘Science and Culture’ founded by the astrophysicist Meghnad Saha, was among the first publications to speculate on issues linked to floods and dam building..
2.3.1 Environmental movements
Guha and Gadgil (1989: 455) defined environmental movement narrowly as « an organized social activity consciously advocating a sustainable use of natural resources, a halt in degradation to enable environmental restauration ». According to Oommen (2004), first movements with environmental features that are without being fundamentally ecological appeared under Jawaharlal Nehru. Economic development was carried out by huge industrial projects financed by the State. Among their negative corollaries was the displacement of thousands of people who then had to migrate into slums. Apolitical, the activists were only opposed to any destructive development done by the State, although they were accused of thwarting development on ecological grounds. Actually, environment appeared as an ally to the victims of the regime with the Naxalite and Chipko movements in the seventies. Politics thus instrumentalized the environment in order to repress landless farmers or to deal with country women. These movements are not ecological in essence, but reflect the affinity of some classes of society for nature that cannot be called as anti-state, rather of solidarity with deprived people (Oommen, 2004).
Also in the seventies started the reflection on women and development. The male bias of modernization was denounced as curbing female emancipation. The conception of work, power and access to land were privileging manhood. Feminists, as Vandana Shiva advocate that the female ecological consicousness make them more capable of managing biodiversity and natural resources (Rishi, 1997). In their agenda, environmental issues are not always priorities but handled when needed. Pragmatic, a collective action was set up when a human dimension was violated, without any real structure of political opportunity. According to Rousset (2004), those social movements were very locally based, aiming at solving local problems affecting a certain type of population (access to land, women issues, child labour, etc.).
Harsh Sethi (1993) classifies these environmental movements in three categories according to their ideological approaches. The first one fights over the right of resources and performs in the political economic realm. The second respond to a particular environmental problem while seeking a suitable technological solution in the socio economic system in place. The last one rejects utterly the present development paradigm by modifying the relation between man and nature. Vandana Shiva (1988) notes that in the West, environmental movements are fighting in favor of conservation and protection of natural resources; whereas in India, similar movements were reacting against a predatory exploitation that has fed development based on market economy.
Actually, the last twenty years, thousand of groups have sprung up: some protest against activities detrimental to the natural environment and some want to regenerate nature while seeking alternatives (Kothari; Moghe; Pathak, 2005). Those supporters of an alternative economic development are interpreting solidarity in terms of the traditional Indian principle of ‘vasudhaiva kutumbakam’ (Earth is a family) related to the Gandhian vision of ‘swaraj’ (autonomous) et du ‘swadeshi’ (the politic of setting up one’s own control over the economic, social and cultural environment) (Pratap, 2001). In this context, they are involved in a political struggle for global solidarity against globalization (Santos, 1997). Finally, very present in the country, foreign NGOs support many environmental projects, but this western funding is under regulation and sometimes considered as a moralistic encroachment slowing down economic development (Banerjee, 2003). The concept of ‘global citizenship’ has appeared, as a constituency opposed to ‘head to head’ politics ratifying international treaties in global institutions (Jasanoff, 2006: 379).
2.3.2 Charisma and Judicial activism
Some movements have been heavily mediatized around emblematic figures as the ecofeminist Vandana Shiva, Medha Patkar (alternative Nobel Prize) or the writer Arundhati Roy. Social capital is very important for an activist who needs to be backed with well connected relations. These movement leaders and environmental activists have sometimes used their consitutional rights to a healthy environment to sue polluters under the public interest litigation (PIL) regime. Writ petition can be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution since 1981 against local bodies in cases that affect individuals. The provisions ‘Right to Life’ (Article 21), and the protection of the environment is a fundamental duty of each citizen (Article 51A) have been used especially by the Supreme Court in dealing with environmental cases, and considering environmental, ecological, air, water, pollution, etc. as amounting to violation to Article 21. Apart from the Indian Constitution, the environmental legislation also has provisions section 16 for the Environment Protection Act 1986 for polluter prosecution, the National Environment Tribunal Act in 1995, the National Environment Appellate Authority Act in 1997.
The judiciary is known for being independent, and its powers of legal adjudication are enormous. However, with the proliferation of legal enactments, the judicial system is crumbling under the weight of numerous cases that continue to be filed before it every year. There is a huge backlog of pending cases. Anyone who is on the wrong side of the law can buy sufficient time and freedom for himself by filing cases and appealing to higher and higher levels. The political authorities have full freedom and the power to keep the judicial system underfunded and understaffed (Jalan, 2005).
What’s the weigh of judiciary activism? Its activity has intensified those past twenty years, in various fields, aiming at implementing public policies. PILs have acted as suasive instrument, an indirect market based instrument. Besides monetary costs, bigger corporation like to minimize the risk of an environmental litigation, which can damage their reputation in the marketplace. US Country Commercial Guide 2002 to invest in India for potential US investors noted that judicial activism is an important factor aiding the growth of the environment market.
At the same time, Public Interest Litigation is a relatively new instrument (1981), but there is a problem of scale, and contradictory interests. Are PIL representative of the communities across social divisions? For instance, the Delhi national parc was inhabited by slum dwellers (Right to life) but the police chased them (Protection of Environment). The legislative and the executive are strongly linked, as the Court has to set up monitoring committees for each case (Rajamani, 2007). Nevertheless, Court rulings indicate that important legislation that did not exist earlier, was initiated in India, especially in terms of vehicular emissions standards. The environmental cases have brought polluters to court to pay for the damages and social costs imposed on society, even in cases involving a large number of polluters and victims. As far as the equity issue, industrial units going out of business is a price that has to be paid for protecting and safeguarding the right of the people living in a healthy environment with minimal disturbance of ecological balance; and without avoidable hazard to them, their cattle, homes and agriculture and undue affectation of air, water, and environment (Badkhal and Surajkund 1996 case, Delhi)
Nevertheless, according to Sawhney, a pure judicial approach to pollution abatement can never be economically effective, since judicial procedures can always be used for stalling remedial action (Sawhney, 2004: 101). That is compliance to standards is undertaken at the beginning to please to Court and the complainants; to be later on abandoned or negotiated with the authorities. So in terms of impact on allocation of resources, courts have often legislated in favor of the ‘privileged’, resulting in a social cost exceeding the profits (Anant & Singh, 2002).
Finally, rare ecological successes are due to the integrity of the judiciary and above all to a massive and international pressure on sensational affairs (Silent Valley, Chipko, the Clémenceau…). In Kerala, the project « Silent Valley » was abandoned by the State; « Chipko » movement in the seventies, when village women had decided to hug trees in order to prevent their felling (Weber, 1988). The Clémenceau, asbestos contaminated ship, was not dismantled in India. But often, even if resistance is done pacifically and for a long time, it is a lost cause, as the ‘Save the Narmada’ movement against the building of the second largest dam in the world. In October 2000, after six years of polemic, the Indian Supreme Court authorized the resumption of work on Sadaar Sarovar. With 3,600 dams, India has become the third dam builder in the world, although water still remains problematic. 226 millions of Indians still do not have access to drinking water. One third of the population lives under the poverty line (less than one dollar per person per day), while tons of cereals are stocked in state granaries (Roy, 2001). Since August 2000, the World Commission on Dams has admitted that dams do not hold to their promises as far as development. Among judiciary actions that have succeeded, the cleaning up of the air in New Delhi and Agra can also be interpretated as political actions to promote tourism and the country’s image abroad.
2.3.3 ‘New Movements’
The phase ‘new social movement’ is in vogue in the contemporary discourse among social scientist and activists. For some the new social movements are the result of the issues of the post modern society (R. Singh, 2001). These movements are not class based and they do not raise economic issues. Nor are they concerned with state power. They raise the issue of humanity cutting across the interests of all classes. Their political identities are not well defined either; their boundaries are changing too; they are a result of processes outside contentious politics (Tilly and Tarrow, 2006).
To what extent is Indian society ‘post modern’ like that of the West? Were there no struggles for identity in the premodern society? Do the environmental movements have no economic content? Are they not confronting the state? Granted that the nature of classes and class relationship have undergone changes in the present global capitalism, do the classes or economic strata have no relevance in the perception of people towards the dominant ideology and power? (Shah, 2004: 23). With the paradigm of new social movements, Andre Gunder Frank and Marta Fuentes (1987) make a distinction between social and political movements. Social movements seek more autonomy rather than state power. The objective of social movements is social transformation. But politics is not only located in the political parties. Any collective endeavour involves capturing or influencing political authority, though it may not be on the immediate agenda (Dhanagare and John, 1988) or through « nostalgic Gandhians converted into environment protection and antiglobalization » (Meyer, 2007: 202).
Mostly led by the middle class, those movements are taking over the problems of the poor classes and the communities. The challenge is to connect those ideas in a relevant dynamic of egality and rights. Those social movements have two parameters in common. Firstly, they express the same dissatisfaction with a modernity that could not solve the classes and casts struggle. They are therefore tackling the egality and identity issues. Secondly, their theories and claims concern all social and economic groups, human rights and the environment (Shah, 2004). Their definitions of the environment, gender and human rights differ from the previous definitions presented by grass roots movements as « Chipko ». Grass roots movements were reacting to an oppressive economic logic that was abusing water, land and fuel resources while controling the subsistence crops. Whereas ‘new’ protestation and mobilization aims at mitigating the negative side of globalization – capital hegemony, foreign debts, structural adjustments – and have a say on technological choices.
The common theme emphasized here is that global economic forces have impacted environmental management both in pollution control as well as in the preservation of the indigenous natural resources endowment of India; and the role of the community has been recognized more formally today. Their participation in forest conservation is even required by footloose international experts (Randeria, 2003). Since environmental values have always been ingrained in the daily lifestyle of indigenous communities of India, there is much to be learned from the traditional values and knowledge for evolving a modern day environmental management system. No matter how rudimentary, community participation in environmental management has taken a foothold in India (Sawhney, 2004).
The 2004 World Social Forum in Mumbai in January threw light on a complex and divided society stigmatized by discrimination (intouchables, women, poors), and social tensions that follow from economic acute inegalities. Even if impact on Indian politics was negligible, this Forum has had positive effects on Indian social movements as part of the global citizen (CRID, 2004). As it brought together social actors from all over the world, enabling Indian movements to get a larger activist horizon. In fact, at a very early stage, western organizations have wanted to prop up this kind of voluntary grass root actions. Numerous partnerships have been established often based on financial support (WWF, Terre des Hommes, Greenpeace among others). All those links tied with the rest of the world have not unified those movements under one flag though. Even if some Indian organizations are in touch with other similar organizations in South Asia, the conscious of an international level and the participation to international affairs only concerns an elite among the Indian world of association (the so called ‘global citizenship’). Still, some movements seek to create a global policy that can be national when federated under a same issue. They want to offer some alternatives to the global governance presumably non sustainable and leading to social violence. Other economic and cultural space have to grow independently from global forces, taking into account India’s singularity too, based on democratic principles of political egality, social justice, cultural diversity, non violence and ecological principles of sustainability and biodiversity (Sheth, 2004). Things might be changing in the liberal globalization context, the awareness of new economic policies impacts on the vulnerable population and the necessity to deal with it at a macro level. But in general the scope of commitment remains at a micro level as many grass root activists were not even aware of the World Social Forum in their country (Ambroise, 2004). For Saroj Giri, sociologist at the University of Delhi, globalization is a non question, most of the movements aim at improving the fate of some vunerable population, dalits, adivasis, street children, sexual workers, etc. They are formed around the threatened community, around the local problem; might be pollution, irrigation illegal expropriation. Movements are de facto separated from each other, no links are established, the universalist dimension is lacking to their commitments and demands:
“The social debate is a juxtaposition of microsocial debate, in which the citizen is not the central figure. The approach is legitimate though, it comes from a certain political culture, but antithetical to the alter-globalization vision in quest for another world society” (quoted by Charrin, 2007: 220)
Therefore, are those new social movements in contradiction with the economic development or are they a necessary corollary? The economist Amartya Sen acknowledges that henceforth it is impossible to stop the globalization of commerce and economies. Forces of economic exchanges and work division are so powerful in a world where competition is fed by technological evolution that provides market edge (Sen, 2003). Nevertheless, the market should not prevail over institutions and social demonstrators are here to remind that globalization has a negative effect that delegitimizes democratic governance practices. Wallerstein (2004) examines the changes in the global capitalist system through the inegalities. The States is made up of an elite and industrialization only benefits to a particular economic group. Their lifestyle is not concern with the environment or social welfare. According to him, only democratic social movements can reverse the system of inegality. Indeed, some micro movements want to revamp democratic participation as a form of social action and political practice (Sheth, 2004: 14).
2.3.4 The Structure of Political Opportunity
Tilly and Tarrow (2006) define several structures to political opportunities namely the centers of power, the openness to new actors, the stability of political alignments, the availability of allies, and the contentious politics. Any changes to the structures provoke some situational opportunities and threats. As we saw, social responses to environmental crisis have been diverse and numerous. In spite of a complicated democracy, there has been some official consensus on environmental sustainability sanctioned by laws, policies and court judgements. Nevertheless, the clash between various organizations has been harsh as in the case of the benefits versus dangers of dams. Sociologist Gail Omvedt directly confronted Arundhati Roy on some of the issues.[9] Citizens and local communities have taken over public space that required State intervention (Dubhashi, 2002). In Agra, when the Supreme Court ordered small industries to adjust to pollution norms, roads were blocked as sign of protest.
All in all, although social movements have existed before Independence, the diversities, social divides and other differences present in India have always prevented them to establish a genuine unity of action and claims (Shah, 2004). Tharoor writes that in India people help each other only if a link between them justifies the act. The family unit being the base, it might extend to a clan or a caste group, friends or neighbors of the village. India is not a welfare state but a welfare society in which people help each other out, provided they feel a connection:
« Unfortunately, our sense of community largely stops there. Very few Indians have a broader sense of community than that circumscribed by ties of blood, caste affiliation, or village. We take care of those we consider near and dear, and remain largely indifferent to the rest. There are Indian charities, both religious and secular, but their work barely scratches the surface of the problems of the people as a whole » (Tharoor, 1997: 290).
This lack of civic responsibility is also present among the politicians, where « forms of organization tend to predominate in the economic and political spheres marked at various levels by autocracy and corruption. In the civil society, forms of functioning where dominates a high distribution of power combined with a commitment to an ethic: the family, the friends and the religion » (D’Iribarne, 2003: 262). In this time of wealth creation marked by inequalities and poverty, social movements are still looking for solidarity, both financial and moral. But if acting locally is necessary to change problematic situations, it is in vain if actions do not influence the decision makers causing these problems. Therefore, corrective action is feasible only if there is more effective political participation by the citizen, but successive opposition parties have also been reluctant to launch agitations on vital issues of common concern: undernutrition, illiteracy, gender inequalities and ecology (Jalan, 2005). An important benefit of democracy and free speech is that, if wrong policies are followed, a correction of these policies is easier and unavoidable in view of public pressure. Correcting unviable policies can be delayed, but it cannot be avoided altogether. Finally, against neo liberal national interests echoed by the media, social movements struggle to channel their views that do not raise major public interest either. Singh and Singh (2006) state that ecological transparency is not relayed by the media so as not to insist on the vulnerability of progress. Yet, as Amartya Sen argued, the debate on ecology, served by better information and out of its marginal situation, could benefit not only the environment, but also the very functioning of the democratic system (Sen, 2000: 164).
As a consequence, new social movements are seeking political voices that suppose a democratic governance and rule of law upheld by civil institutions and courts. In order to achieve these goals, advocacy involves attempts to influence the political climate, public perceptions and policy decisions. In its broadest sense, advocacy therefore is a strategy to influence policy makers when they make laws and regulations, distribute resources, and make other decisions that affect peoples’ lives. In short, advocacy means supporting a cause and trying to get others to support it. Fundamentally, the word has come to mean redressing unequal power relationships. It implies moving beyond the politics of protest to the politics of engagement. Usually played out in the public domain, it involves speaking up to draw a community’s attention to an important issue (CSE for Advocacy, 2007).
Part III) Some Conclusions
Facing the globalization, numerous mecanisms of regulations of public goods has developped among various stakeholders as a consequence of neo liberal politics (opening up to market, decentralization, new public management, privatizations). In various areas, the hierarchy of state rationality yields to networks of autonomous and interdependent stakeholders, to agreements called partnerships at a national level and regimes at an international level (Jessops, 1998), to which States depend on. MNCs and private sector lobbying can even directly influence public policy. Protection of environment and social rights does not lie in the government’s hand anymore. Negociation and responsiblity is distributed along two parts: the supranational and the infranational. The DMIC project perfectly illustrates this trend. In order to attain economic sustainable development, states, development and finance companies as well as investors are basing their strategy on a globally competitive environment and state-of-the-art infrastructure to activate local commerce and enhance foreign investments. Although concerns for social and environmental sustainability are raised, notably by the Japanese government (Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, 2007), the process of governance involves horizontally, powerful stakeholders ; and vertically, a power sharing and a local adaptation of the legal norms that unfortunately might leave out the ecological and to some extent the social sustainability.
The changes are seeming in environmental issues. Public policies, corporate commitments and social movements put forward a multiplication of stakeholders with specificities of their strategies and their alliances. And each stakeholder is carrying a piece of legitimity and power, financial or symbolic (Le Galès, 1995). First of all, the State, understood in its various institutional forms carries contradictions; neither the dispersal of public authority via decentralization, nor the growth of regulation modes of the private sector have diminished the power of bureaucratie (Scholte, 2000). Corruption, inefficiency, and unaccountability, are in sum governance problems that small and large corporations denounce while being accomplice. Even if the more and more practised principles of corporate social and environmental responsibility aimed at rationalizing economic activities, they finally perfectly espouse legislation lacunae and even weigh them down. Finally, social movements have seen their political opportunities turned into threats; suffering from a lack of credentials and institutional support. Even courts probity is now questioned by some activists (Social Watch India, 2007).
As a matter of fact, the environmental situation has reached such an alarming level that public policies aiming at sustainability cannot be implemented with acceptable economic, social, political and cultural costs for the stakeholders. Until now, any adjustments to saveguard the environment have implied costs that none of the stakeholders were ready to bear. The only financial alternatives have been fundings for biological conservation and carbon credit both stemming from the World Bank, and therefore controversial. Besides, perception, management and exposure to pollution are highly unequal among stakeholders. Economic development cannot be done without harming the environment of the poorer segment of the population. Middle and upper classes have to resign to the idea that the country cannot pursue its economic growth without being polluted. So far the chosen alternative is the environment as a ‘lifestyle’, that is no reduction in mode of consumption while attempting to mitigate the pollution around oneself.
Is therefore environmental governance a simple dichotomy between brown against green issues, rich against poor, urban against villages? As “the borders of public policies are blurred, fields of expertise not well assured and actors not always grouped in professions capable to build a discourse on the world” (Muller, 2000: 202), is it possible that economic, social and environmental issues are reformulated in public actions?
We will attempt to identify and analyze some reference frameworks. The onset of envionmental awareness is the result of historical, economic, social and cultural process that dates back from the Chipko first celebrated environmental movement in the early seventies (Guha, 1989). Liberalization and privatization, along with its corollary of social injustice have just accelerated environmental degradation. So nowadays, the notion of environment is linked to multiple factors (financial, social and ecological stakes), which explains partly institutional incapacity. On the whole, environmental degradation resulted from a mode of economic production based on conflict more than on harmony with the ecosystem. It started with colonization (exploitation of non renewables) and went on with industrialization and the extension of private proprieties (Steppacher, 1995), as illustrated by an industrial exploitation of timber, agriculture, water, fish and mining in exchange for foreign currencies. Private propriety also enabled the set up of industrial estates, townships and special economic zones that led to rise of land value. Infrastructures and the related industries require large reserved space that limits people space (Prud’homme, 2004), sometimes compelled to leave and move into overcrowded or infertile areas. The globalization increased the energy consuming process. And the industrial system is considered as independent from the Biosphere. The environmental impact is not only limited to pollution, but affects the whole planet.
Environmental governance is therefore linked to the Indian social order, itself related to the international order that constraints the country economically and politically, as in the climate change debate. This contexte strongly bipolarizes the governance issues: on one hand, environment makes up the livelihood of some people, who are not meant to understand the effects of pollution ; on the other hand, environment is a lifestyle for the metropolitans, that is pollution is no more visible. It must be underscored that the split is definitely not clear cut, as different alliances and networks are operating more or less efficiently. But the mechanisms of social regulations are transposed into the environmental governance that creates that bipolarization. In the case of industrial pollution, dominating classes have maintained a social and ecological order that protect them while exposing dominated classes (slums dwellers are always the most vulnerable). Nevertheless, this ecological unbalance has also hit urban areas, where even dominating classes are affected by urban pollution may it be the air, the water, the noise and to some extent the effects of global warming. Very difficult issue to manage, the situation is quasi irreversible partly due to the rebound effect (the growth factor cancels the environmental efforts - Narain, 2007). A coherently implemented environmental policy would imply a determined State and dwindled economic growth, which would seriously question the current globalized capitalism path. In fact, since 1991, the trend has been to adapt national laws to satisfy investors (Sassen, 1996). Coherent environmental policy actually encompasses the simple environment. The Indian government has mobilized the claim of national interest to justify policies and projects that affected the poor, as in cases of dams (Baviskar, 2005) whereas any international environmental pressure has been perceived as an intrusion of national sovereignty over control and access to natural resources (Deshpande, 1997).
Recent regional development policies of decentralization has probably accentuated environmental degradation, as states are competing against each other in a race of modernization and investment poles (Kennedy, 2007). In the Industrial Corridor, investors are targeting clusters of small scale industries, known for their ecological havoc (CSE, 1999). Many of these industries argue that if they were to conform to environmental norms, they would become unecnomical. They assert that there is a trade-off between generating employment and profit and protecting the environment. Actually, most industries in India (40.6 percent) according to the World Business Environment Survey (2000) complained of environmental regulatory constraints. At this point, any short term major environmental improvement seems Utopian, at least without any international aid. During the Sustainable Development Summit held in Delhi in February 2008, Manmohan Singh stressed the need to access to technology transfer providing environment friendly technologies, especially in energy, transportation, manufacturing and agriculture (DSDS, 2008, Prime Minister’s inaugural speech). Yet, even if the international milieu seems to agree, do alignment of different policies correspond to private interests, at municipal, state, national and international levels?
Part IV) Hypotheses and Methodology
During my first exploratory fieldwork in January-February 2008, I could better locate nodes along the Delhi Mumbai Corridor, and identify some problems, actors, nodals points, norms and processes (Hufty, 2008) through visits, interviews, conferences and research in institutions (see Mission Report – May 2008). My questions of research aimed at obtaining factual information. Chiefly:
1 What is the influence of social movements on politics?
2 How do social movements participate in the decision making and implementation of public policies?
3 How do enterprises adapt to the legislation and the growing environmental constraints?
4 How to propose consensual alternatives to the implementation of ‘sustainable development’?
The week spent in Surat – Gujarat in company of students of the School of Planning and Architecture was highly useful. First of all, urban and peri urban state of the environment can be physically assessed. Visits included business associations, industries, SEZ, treatment plant, as well as institutions and universities. Dr Sridharan introduced students to several interlocutors that could be interviewed. Results of the research have been recorded in a paper “Urban Growth and Environmental Decay: Surat” presented during the IHEID seminar on urban governance.
Findings showed that in spite of genuine vulnerability, a piecemeal approach of environmental management is carried out by the state along with private consultants. However, carbon credit schemes represented an innovation in environmental management.
Urban governance is indeed fragmented and even sometimes incoherent, caught in between vertical and horizontal, sometimes contradictory public actions.
A relative absence of the citizen’s voice as citizens will not make a trade-off between environmental quality and economic or social benefits.
Findings enable me to utter some hypotheses that lead to a ‘problématique’. A possible second field trip would be beneficial to our work.
4.1 Hypotheses
According to the theoretical framework and the exploratory fieldwork, only a small fraction of actors actually influence the decision making process and change of norms. They are under the influence of conflicting international pressures. The following hypotheses are therefore uttered:
First hypothesis
At the municipal level, urban environmental issues have responded to different logics that resulted from political, economic, social and territorial pressures; and reactive, rather than proactive attitute to brown ecological issues. The concept of environment is first ‘politically’ polluted. As in the case of Surat, lack of faith in the state institutions led metropolitans to turn to private sectors for effective ‘livestyle’ environment whereas governance process has stamped out affected lower classes. Can one therefore assume that a similar process is taken place in rural areas for green environmental issues? Consequently, are peri urban zones afflicted by both industrial pollution and loss of natural resources combined with deficiencies in governance?
Second hypothesis:
Relationship between class and environment has deep implications for the large number of people who live in poverty. Even if environmental concerns and activism are expressed in a variety of ways, the elite has to be considered as main stakeholder of change, reforms and actions. In fact, ‘environment’ has prompted many strategies. Consultants in environment have mushroomed. Citizens’ associations for clean environment are present is almost every urban area. Large corporations are swiftly seeking carbon credits while reinventing their corporate responsiblity from social to environment friendly policies. Conditions of the appropriation of the terms ‘sustainable’, ‘green’, ‘ecofriendly’ and so on varies according to stakeholders, but policies are not meant to induce any strucutural or social changes. They are meant to satisfy a growing middle class’ aspiration to progress and to reassure the international community of investors (see World Bank, 2006). Even Courts and especially the Supreme Court is no longer favoring environmental issues at the expense of economic development (HRLN, 2008).
Third hypothesis
As Amita Baviskar (2005) argues, a social movement is powerful because its meanings are ambiguous and shifting. For tribals, it may represent a fight to hold on their land whereas for upper and middle classes it may be a fight over a nature reserve. All in all, environmentalist discourses expect that the poor are ecologically frugal and respectful when given monitored control over resources. But when landless or displaced people actually demand structural changes and full control over resources, they are coined as environmentalist anymore, but as socialist, Marxist or even terrorist (Conference A.J. Mehra, 19 May 2008). In other words, the economic potential determines almost entirely the political orientation of a environmental movement. In the western part of India, along the Corridor, people’s movements over the environment is perceived by the State as social, cultural, symbolic or even religious (the sacred Ganges pollution) and not threatening. On the contrary, in the eastern part, people’s claims over corportate state’s seizure and control of resources are considered as Naxalite and dangerous.
Fourth hypothesis
The intended Kuznets curve has achieved unexpected development. The increase in demand for sustainable development has led to a shift in the issues. Most polluting industries might move to another state or erect clusters defended by some corporate associations (Kathuria & Sterner, 2006) so that local problems are temporarly solved. Another example mentioned was that Delhi Metro intended at reducing traffic and air pollution, now needs electricity that may be powered by nuclear. Governance of sustainable development is therefore caught in various frameworks that might complement, contradict or even cancel each other out. At the international level, official commitments are shared, but respond to the Neo-Malthusian framework: demogaphy will result in global environmental detriment, whereas judicious economy combined with technology will not. The central level somehow echoes this view. On the Republic Day January 26th 2001, the then President KR Narayanan refered to the dilemmas of development: “Let it not be said by future generations that the Indian Republic has been built on the destruction of green earth and innocent tribals who have been living there for centuries.” Less than three years later, on November 1st 2003, in a speech to the 19th World Mining Congress, the then President APJ Kalam contradicted the concerns of his predecessor: “The fecilitation of project through provision of land, infrastructural development, community development, etc., can be done by the government agencies while the investments in the mines and associated technological inputs can come from the private sector... In addition, the private sector must have freedom to run the mine in a cost-effective manner...” (quoted in Alternative Perspective, June 2008). The same contradictions reside at the state level, as law implementation rather aims at smoothing the economic reterritorialization and rescaling. This fragmentation of land has brought social and ecological fragmentation almost institutionalized in a neo-colonialism ideology of geographical cantonment (Milbert, Presentation ‘Gated Communities’, EADI, June 2008). Has economic sustainability been achieved in becoming a rich nation with poor people, and an increasingly depleted environment?
These hypotheses lead to the larger ‘problématique’ of citizenship in the question: has globalization induced changes in interface between stakeholders of sustainable development: the State, the corporations and the social movements?
4.2 Methodology
1. Sample
The research will focus mainly on verifying the hypotheses. Field work limits to brown issues as industrial pollution in two states, namely Gujarat and Maharshtra, to one or two growing cities, peri urban areas and possibly rural areas along the Industrial Corridor as suggested Dr Sridharan.
People surveyed will preferably represent a sample of relevant stakeholders; that is government officials, members of business association and corporates, academics and of course citizens involved developmental issues (possible marginal secant actors). This level of analysis concerns mainly the macrolevel of decision centered on the elite. Nevertheless, the meso and even micro level can be considered.
Besides, discourses of decision makers can also infer modes of regulations, cognitive framework and power relations that influence this segment and supposedly dominates other actors (Musselin, 2005).
2. Tools
The qualitative research will be based on this sample. According to Cohen (1999) non directive interviews aim at finding out systems of values, norms, representations, and symboles peculiar to a certain culture. Similarly, the cognitive framework of public analysis (Muller, 2000) acknowledge that the frame of reference is not fixed, not fully coherent and without ambiguity. What actually matters is the link between public policies and the frame of reference that enable interpretation (Musselin, 2005).
Later in the research, once contact is established, semi directive interviews can be envisaged. They enable to combine open and closed, general and precise questions while maintaining the exchange inside a framework. In depth interviews enable the contradiction and the objection not available in written sources (Cohen, 1999). Finally, compilation and secondary analysis of documents will complement the research: official and corporate reports and data, as well as academic or private agent analysis. The results will consist in a global vision of the ‘space’ in which stakeholders evolve, and the ‘multi-positionnality’ of some of them (Mathieu, 2002). As the cognitive analysis delineates a theory of change that tries to address the concrete mechanisms by which structure limits the actors’ leeway in the process of formulating and setting up policies (Muller, 2000); the general analysis will therefore include perceptions (referentiels) of environmental issues and their capacities to deal with it at different levels. This approach might be combined with a qualitative analysis of discourses, characterized by ‘inferences’ (Bardin, 1991). Final results will help check the validity of the four hypotheses and provide some insights on citizenship and our ‘problématique’.
The limits include the methods of observation, not participatory and limited in time. Then the scale and levels of observations will be reduced to some areas in two states and to some actors due to lack of time and resources.
4.3 Specificity of the Field
2nd Trip to India 1st to 24th September, 2008
Research in Mumbai Peri Urban areas with Master students of the School of Planning Architecture
Attendance to the 14th Annual International Sustainable Development Research Conference September 21-23, 2008, India Habitat Centre New Delhi, India.
Some themes and questions
How is development made along some districts in the Corridor? Several districts of million plus population are developing north/north-east of Mumbai. Their situation near the river, make them vey eco-sensitive. Their geographical setting is limited too, represent alternative to the overpopulated and saturated big metropolitans. They are even competing against each other for investments and industrialization; as much as their legal and institutional situation permits. How are environmental issues and risks dealt with, as the notorious heat sinks or monsoons? What is their complementarity with the urban? What blueprint for the future? What differences with the previous case of Surat in Gujarat? Can macrolevel policies address the micro? Is extrapolation permitted through these examples? Introduction to key speakers, field visits, and observation will enable relevant comparison between places, stakeholders and practices.
Places and people to visit
1) Kalyan-Dombivali is a city and a municipal corporation in Thane district in the Indian state of Maharashtra.
2) Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) and the district of Mira – Bhayandar: growing hinterlands. The MMRDA is responsible for the preparation of perspective plans, the promotion of alternative growth centres, the strengthening of infrastructure facilities and the provision of development finances.
3) CIDCO is the City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. It was established in 1970 to ensure that area of Navi Mumbai develops neatly and also attracts people, who would otherwise have settled in Mumbai. According to CIDCO, project affected people were offered 12.5 per cent of Navi Mumbai developed land.
4) Vasai – Virar Subregion represents Node N°20 in the DMIC project. In the nineties, this land suffered from problems related to drainage, sewerage, water supply and roads. CIDCO has allegedly turned it into a 10’000 hectare urbanized area. Now, project is to cater to traffic to/from Mumbai, other than J.Nehru Port along new Vasai road and developing additional dedicated freight corridor spurs (Vasai Road-Diva-Panvel-Karjat-Pune).
Planned meetings with stakeholders at:
Municipality level: 1 Mira Bhayandar 2 Virar Vasai 3 Kalyan Dombivili
Department of Urban Development: Deputee Secretary
Deputee Director of Town Planning
Deputee Commissioner Administration
Maharashtra Pollution Control Board
NGOs
Conference
The International Sustainable Development Research Society is organizing the conference in New Delhi, on September 21-23, 2008: “India provides a very important platform and context for sustainable development research. The topics discussed and research themes addressed will cover the diversity of aspects and approaches in sustainable development research”. The Conferene will be hosted by the Management Development Institute, India in collaboration with Corporate Social Responsibility in Asia, University of Hong Kong, ERP Environment, Abo Akademi University, the Finnish Environment Institute and Academy of Finland. As dialogue is promoted between participants from various countries, 26 tracks for workshops will be opened in topics as government policies, CSR, role of NGOs, mega cities, industrial ecology and climate change (www.isdrs.org).
V) Calendar
- End of September 2008 : presentation of MPT, start to look for funds and scholarships
- Processing of data from September field work.
- December 2008 : Participation in a course organized by the Centre for Ecological Economics and Natural Resources of the Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC) Bangalore, India in collaboration with the Nordic Centre in India (NCI) on new approaches in the study of environmental issues in India (to be confirmed).
- 2009 : redaction and analyze of interviews and secondary data
- Handing in of different chapters for correction
- 2010 : defense of thesis
VI) Annexes
Bibliography
Monographs
Agarwal, Anil; Sunita, Narain, 1992, Global Warming in an Unequal World: a Case of Environmental Colonialism, Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi, India
Agarwal, Arun & Sivaramakrishnan, K. ed., 2001, Social Nature: Resources, Representation, and Rule in India, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 2001
Assayag, Jackie, 2005, La mondialisation vue d’ailleurs : l’Inde désorientée, Paris : Editions du Seuil.
Aubertin, Catherine, Vivien, F-D., 1998, Les enjeux de la biodiversité, Paris : Economica.
Audinet, Pierre, 2006. “L’environnement naturel et le développement en Inde”, dans L’Inde contemporaine : de 1950 à nos jours, Paris : Fayard/CERI.
Auluck, S. 2007, « Development Potential and the Environmental Impact Assessment of Urban Projects : An Indian Approach », in Ta’i, Murphy, Rana (eds), Environmental Impact Assessment : Indo-Australian Perspective, New Delhi : Bookwell.
Bakan, Joel, 2004, The Corporation – the pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power, Free Press.
Baviskar, Amita, 2005, “Red in Tooth and Claw? Looking for Class Struggles over Nature”, in R. Ray and M. Fainsod Katzenstein (eds), Social Movements in India: Poverty, Power, and Politics, Oxford:Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 161-178.
Boillot, Jean-Joseph, 2006, L’économie de l’Inde, Paris : La Découverte
Bourguignon, F. & Devarajan, Shantayanan & Kharas, Homi, 2007, Dancing with Giants, World bank.
Brenner, N., 2004, New State Spaces. Urban Governance and the Rescaling of Statehood, Oxford University Press.
Brundtland, Gro Harlem, 1989. Notre Avenir à tous, rapport de la commission mondiale sur l’Environnement et le Développement, Les Editions du Fleuve, Paris (trad. française de Our Common Future, 1987)
Cadène, Philippe, 2007, “Les mutations de l’industrie dans les pays en développement”, in La Mondialisation, Paris: SEDES, p 55.
Chahoud, Tatjana et al., 2007, Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility in India – Assessing the UN Global Compact’s Role, Bonn: German Development Institute.
Chakraborty, Amrita ed, 2006, Poverty and Environment : an Introduction, Hyderabad : Icfai University Press pp103-109
Chandra Kumar, Nirmal, 2007 « China and India: Growth With or Without Equity ? » Paris, UNESCO
Charrin, Eve, 2007, L’Inde à l’assaut du monde, Paris: Grasset.
Cohen Samy, dir., 1999, L’art d’interviewer les dirigeants, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Daly, H. and Farley, J. 2004. Ecological Economics: Principles and Applications. Washington: Island Press
Das, Keshab (ed.), 2005, Indian Industrial Clusters. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Dasgupta, P., 1994: "Poverty and the Environment: Is There a Trade-off?" in Campiglio, et al (eds.), The Environment after Rio: International Law and Economics, pp. 249-59. Graham & Trotman/ Martinus Nijhoff. London/ The Hague.
Dash, Dhanlaxmi, 2005, Women, Environment and Health, Mangal Deep Publications, Jaipur.
Dayanandan, R. (ed.), 2005, Sustainable Development : Opportunities and Challenges, New Delhi : Serials Publications
Della Porta, Donatella; Diani, Mario, 2006, Social Movements : An Introduction, USA, UK, Australia : Blackwell Publishing, Second Edition.
Diamond, Jared, 2004, Collapse: How Societies Choose To Fail Or Succeed, New York: The Viking Press.
D’Iribarne, Philippe, 2003, Le Tiers-monde qui réussit : nouveaux modèles, Paris :Odile Jacob.
Divan, Shyam; Rosencranz, Armin, 2005, Environmental Law and Policy in India: Cases, Materials and Statutes, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, Second Edition
Doabia, TS, Justice, 2005, Environmental and Pollution Laws in India: Alongwith a Special Chapter on Environmental Pollution and ISO 14001 Standards, New Delhi, Wadhwa and Company Nagpur, First Edition 2005, Volume 1&2.
Drucker, Peter, 2005. Ecosystems and Human well being : Opportunity and Challenges for Business and Industry, World Resources Institute.
Dubhashi, P.R. 2002, “People’s Movement against Global Capitalism”, in Economic and Political Weekly February 9, p 537.
Erkman, Suren, 1998, Vers une écologie industrielle, Paris : Editions Charles Léopold Mayer.
Erkman, Suren & Ramaswamy, Ramesh, 2003, Applied Industrial Ecology : a new platform for planning sustainable societies, Bangalore : Aicra Publishers
Etienne, Gilbert, 2006, “L’heure des réformes économiques” (1980-2005), in Jaffrelot (ed.), L’Inde contemporaine de 1950 à nos jours, Paris : Fayard.
Flavin, Christopher; G. Gardner, 2006. la Chine, l’Inde et le nouvel ordre mondial, Genève: L’état de la planète.
Faulks, K., 2000, Citizenship, London: Routledge.
Fort, Monique, 2007, « Mondialisation et développement : quelle place pour l’environnement ? », in La Mondialisation, Paris : SEDES, p.117-126.
Gadgil, Madhav; Guha, Ramachandra, 1995, Ecology and Equity. The Use and Abuse of Nature in Contemporary India, New Delhi.
Gadrey, J.& Jany-Catrice, F, 2005, Why should there only be GDP?Les nouveaux indicateurs de richesse, Paris : La découverte, coll. Repères n°404.
Gautier, François, 2000, Un autre regard sur l’Inde, Genève: édition du Tricorne.
Guha, Ramachandra, 1989, The Unquiet Woods: Ecological Change and Peasant Resistance in the Himalaya, Expanded Edition. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Guha, Ramachandra, 2000; Environmentalism: A global history, New York: Longman.
Gupta, Akhil; Ferguson, James (eds), 1997, Anthropological Locations : Boundaries and Grounds of a Field Science, Berkeley : University of California Press.
Gupta, Desh & Bhagwan Dahiya, 2007, “Governance Issues in India”, in Siddiqui (ed), India and South Asia : economic developments in the age of globalization, Armonk – London : M.E. Sharpe.
Gupta, Shreekant, 2001, India : Mainstreaming Environment for Sustainable Development, Manila : Asian Development Bank.
Hettige, Hemamala, Mainul Sheoli Pargal, and David Wheeler. 1996. Determinants of Pollution Abatement in Developing Countries. Evidence from South and South East Asia. World Development 24 (12): 1891–1904.
Jaffrelot, Christophe (sous la dir. de), 2006. L’Inde contemporaine de 1950 à nos jours, Fayard, Paris.
Jalan, Bimal, 2005, The Future of India : politics, economics and governance, New Delhi : Penguin Books.
Jasanoff, Sheila, 2006, “Science and Environmental Citizenship“, in Handbook of global environmental politics, pp. 365-381
Johnson, Chalmers, 1966, Revolutionary Change, Boston: Little Brown.
Kakar, Sudhir & Katharina. 2007. Les Indiens: portrait d’un peuple, Paris : Seuil (pour la trad. française).
Kamdar, Mira, 2007, Planet India: How the Fastest-Growing Democracy is transforming America and the World, New York: Scribner.
—,2008, L’Ascension turbulente d’un géant démocratique, Arles: Actes Sud.
Kumar Sen, Raj ed., 2006, Indian Economic Development: Globalisation, Transformation, Equity, Crime and Economic Thinking, New Delhi: Deep&Deep Publications.
Landy, Frédéric, 2002, L’Union indienne, Paris : Editions du Temps.
Mancebo, François, 2006. Le Développement durable, Armand Colin, Paris.
Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2002. The environmentalism of the poor, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham and Northampton.
Mathieu, Lilian, 2002. « Rapport au politique, dimension cognitives et perspectives pragmatiques dans l’analyse des mouvements sociaux », dans Revue française de science politique, vol. 52, n°1, février, p. 75-100.
Mate, 2001. Stratégie nationale du développement durable, projet document d’avancement (22/05/2001), Mate, direction des études économiques de l’évaluation environnementale, Paris.
Mehta et al, 1999, Exploring understandings of institutions and uncertainty : new directions in natural resource management, Brighton : Institute of Development Studies (IDS).
Meyer, Eric Paul, 2007, Une histoire de l’Inde : les Indiens face à leur passé, Paris : Albin Michel.
Mies, Maria & Shiva, Vandana, 1998. Ecoféminisme, Paris :L’Harmattan.
Milbert, Isabelle, 2007, “Mondialisation, gouvernance et développement”, in La Mondialisation, Paris: SEDES, p 27.
Milbert, Isabelle, 2006. “La construction de l’économie” (1947-1980), dans L’Inde contemporaine de 1950 à nos jours, Paris : Fayard.
Neveu Érik. 2000. Sociologie des mouvements sociaux. Paris: La découverte.
Oomen, T.K., 2004. Nation, Civil Society and Social Movements: Essays in political sociology, New Delhi, London: Thousand Oaks, pp. 121, 225.
Planning Commission of India. 2006. Towards Faster and More Inclusive Growth: An Approach to the 11th Five Year Plan. New Delhi.
Prasad Panda, Bhavani, 2007, Human Rights, Development and Environmental Law, Delhi : Academic Excellence.
Pratap, Vijay, 2001. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam: A New Alliance for Democracy in the Era of Globalisation, Delhi: CSDS Mimeo.
Rangarajan, Mahesh ed., 2008, Environmental Issues in India : a reader, Delhi : Pearson Longman.
Ray, Raka; Fainsod, M., 2005, Social Movements in India: Poverty, Power, and Politics, Rowman & Littlefield
Redclift, Michael, 1987, Sustainable Development : Exploring the contradictions, London&New York, Routledge.
Rodary, E.;C. Castallanet, G. Rossi, 2003, Conservation de la nature et développement. L’intégration impossible ? Paris : Karthala-GRET.
Rodrik D.& A. Subramanian, 2004. From Hindu Growth to productivity surge :the mystery of the Indian growth transition », NBER n°10376, March.
Roy, A. (2001). Power politics. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Santos, Boaventura de Sousa, 1997. “Toward a Multicultural Conception of Human Rights”, in Zeitschrift fur Rechtssoziologie, 18(1), pp 1-15.
Sassen, Saskia, 1996, Losing Central Sovereignty in the Age of Globalization, Columbia University Press
Sawhney, Aparna, 2004. The New Face of Environmental Management in India, England&USA : Ashgate studies in environmental and natural resource economics.
Scholte, J.A., 2000, Globalization, A Critical Introduction, New York: Saint Martin Press.
Scott, James, 1985, Weapons of the Weak : Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance¸ New Haven: Yale University Press.
Sen, Amartya, 2003. Un nouveau modèle économique: Développement, justice, liberté, Odile Jacob, Paris.
Sethi, Harsh, 1993. “Survival and Democracy: Ecological Struggles in India”, in New Social movements in the South: Empowering the People. Edited by Poona Wignaraja, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Shah, G., 1997, Public Health and Urban Development: The Plague in Surat, New Delhi: Sage Publications
Shah, Ghanshyam, ed., 2004. Social Movements in India: a review of literature, Sage Publications, New Delhi London: Thousand Oaks, second edition.
Shankar, Jha, Prem, 2004, « India : From Development to Predatory State », in Munshi, S. & Abraham Biju Paul (eds) Good Governance, Democracy, Sociology and Globalization, ND-Toaks-London : Sage Publications
Shiva, Vandana, 1988. Staying Alive : Women, Ecology and Development, London: Zed Books.
Shiva, V., 2005. Earth Democracy : justice, sustainability and peace, London:Zed books.
Singh K.; A. Shishodia, 2007, Environmental Economics : theory and application, New Delhi : Sage Publications
Singh, Rajendra, 2001, Social Movements, Old and New: A Post-modernist Critique, New Delhi:Sage Publications.
State of the World 2004, 2005. La consommation assassine: comment le mode de vie des uns ruine celui des autres, pistes pour une consommation responsible, Paris: Charles Léopold Mayer.
Steppacher, R. 1995, « L’ingérence écologique et la globalisation de l’économie de marché », in Ecologie contre nature : développement et politiques d’ingérence, Genève : Nouveaux Cahiers de l’IUED, p. 107
Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2006. Un autre monde: contre le fanatisme du marché, Paris: Fayard.
Visvanathan, Shiv, 1985, Organizing for Science, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Subramanian, T.S.R., 2004, Journeys through Babudom and Netaland: Governance in India, New Delhi: Rupa.
Ta’i, B.; Murphy, P.; Rana, P.S. (eds), 2007, Environmental Impact Assessment: Indo-Australian Perspective, New Delhi: Bookwell.
Tarrow, Sidney, 2005, The New Transnational Activism, Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics, Cambridge University Press.
Tellenne, C. & Moreau, S., 2005, “La grande peur du XXIe siècle – l’Inde et la Chine au défi du développement durable”, Géopolitique du développement durable, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Tharoor, Shashi, 2007, India: From Midnight to the Millennium, New York: Harper Perennial.
Tilly, C. and S. Tarrow, 2006, Contentious Politics, Boulder: Paradigm Publishers, CO, USA
Varma, Pavan K., 2005, Le défi indien : pourquoi le XXIe siècle sera le siècle de l’Inde, Arles : Actes sud (pour l’éd. française)
Vivien, Franck-Dominique, 1994, Economie et Ecologie, Paris : Repère, la Découverte, p.95
Wallerstein, Immanuel, 2004. World Systems Analysis, Durham NC: Duke University Press.
Weber, Thomas. 1988. Hugging the Trees: The Story of the Chipko Movement. Viking, New Delhi.
Wilkinson, Paul, 1971, Social Movements, London: Pall Mall.
Wilkinson, Steven L., 2006, “The Politics of Infrastructural Spending in India”, Background paper for Dancing with Giants : China, India, in the Global Economy, Washington DC :The World Bank and the Institute of Policy Studies
Winters, L. Alan & Yusuf, Shahid, ed., 2007, Dancing with Giants : China, India, in the Global Economy, Washington DC :The World Bank and the Institute of Policy Studies
Yusuf, Shahid, Nabeshima, Kaoru, and Perkins, Dwight H., 2007, « China and India Reshape Global Industrial Geography », in Dancing with Giants : China, India, in the Global Economy, ed. Winters and Yusuf, Washington DC :The World Bank and the Institute of Policy Studies
Zarsky, Lyuba, 2001, From Bystanders to Collaborators : New Roles for Civil Society in Urban Industrial Envrionmental Governance, Manilla : Asian Development Bank
Zins, Max-Jean, 1999. Inde, un destin démocratique, collection “Asie Plurielle”, Paris : La Documentation française, p. 16.
Ziegler, Jean, 2005. L’Empire de la honte, Paris :Fayard.
Articles
Adve, Nagraj, 2007. “Implications of Climate Panel Report”, in Economic and Political Weekly, March 24, p. 1001
Aiyar, Shankkar, 2007, « Hidden Deficit », in India Today, August 6, p. 48-50.
Anant, T C A, Singh, J., 2002, « An Economic Analysis of Judicial Activism », in Economic and Political Weekly, October 26, p.4433
Author unknown, « Indian President Calls for 60M Tonnes of Biodiesel/Year by 2030; 50% of Current Oil Consumption », 9 June 2006, http://www.greencarcongress.com
Author unknown, «Now a bigger Delhi-Mumbai ind corridor», in Times News Network, June 24, 2007 ; http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/
Ayres, Robert, Knesse, Allan, 1969, « Production, consumption and externalities », in American Economic Review, n°59, pp.282-297
Bhaduri, Amit, 2008, “Predatory Growth”, in Economic and Political Weekly, April 19, pp.10-14.
Chatterjee, Surojit, 2008, « Six Indian companies receive award for corporate social responsibility », in International Business Times, May 21. http://in.ibtimes.com/articles/20080521/corporate-social-responsibility-csr-businessworld-ficci-sedf-award.htm.
Chetan, Chauhan, 2008, « Climate change is not as big a problem, says report », in HindustanTimes, April 01
Choudhury, Gaurav, 2007, « 4,000 sq km Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor », in Hindustan Times, New Delhi, July 02, 2007, http://www.hindustantimes.com
Cohen, Samy, 2005, “Les États face aux « nouveaux acteurs », in Politique internationale, n°107.
Cullet, P.& Raja, J. “Intellectual property rights and biodiversity management: the case of India, in Global Environmental Politics 4:1, February 2004, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Curmally, Atiyah, 2002, « Environmental Governance and Regulation in India », in 3i Network (eds.) India Infrastructure Report 2002, New Delhi : Oxford University Press, pp.96-108
Deshpande, Satish, 1997, « From Development to Adjustmen : Economic Ideologies, the Middle Class and 50 Years of Independence », in Review of Development and Change 2, n°2, pp294-318.
Dogra, Bharat, 2008, “Should India have a New Political Party?”, in Mainstream, Vol XLVI, No 25, June 8th, http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article740.html
Dubey, Sunita, 2002, « Disarming the Law », in India Together, New Delhi, December, http://www.indiatogether.org/environment/articles/eia1202.htm
Edmunds, David; Wollenberg, Eva, 2001, “A Strategic Approach to Multistakeholder Negotiations”, in Development and Change, Vol. 32, Institute of Social Studies, pp. 231-253.
Garg, Amit, Shukla, P. R. & Kapshe, Manmohan, 2007, « From climate change impacts to adaptation: A development perspective for India », in Natural Resources Forum 31, pp. 132–141
Guha, R. & Gadgil, M., 1989, « State Forestry and Social Conflict in British India », Past and Present, n°123, May.
Gupta, Joyeeta; M. Hisschenmöller, 1999, « Problem-Solving through International Environmental Agreements: The Issue of Regime Effectiveness », in International Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science politique, Vol. 20, No. 2,The Pursuit of Sustainable Development: Concepts, Policies and Arenas. La recherche du développement viable: concepts, politiques et forums#. (Apr., 1999), pp. 151-173.
Guha Ray, Shantanu, 2008, « A New Grand Trunk Road – For Industry », in Tehelka, vol. 5, Issue 6, New Delhi, 16 February, pp. 42-43.
Impact Team, 2007. « Energy conservation and efficiency », in India Today, Vol. 32, n°22, June 4, 2007, New Delhi, pp.98-103.
Jenson Jane and Susan D. Phillips.1996. « Regime Shift: New Citizenship Practices in Canada ». International Journal of Canadian Studies 4 (fall) : 1-25.
Jessop, B., 1998, « L’essor de la gouvernance et ses risques d’échec. Le cas du développement économique », in Revue internationale des sciences sociale, nº155, pp. 31-49.
Jobert Bruno. 1995. «La fin de l’État tutélaire». Cahiers de recherche sociologique 24: 107-125.
Kathuria, V.& T. Sterner, 2006, « Monitoring and enforcement: Is two-tier regulation robust? — A case study of Ankleshwar, India », in Ecological Economics n°57, pp. 477– 493
Kathuria, V., 2007, « Informal regulation of pollution in a developing country : Evidence from India », in Ecological Economics 63, p. 403-417
Kennedy, L., 2007, « Regional industrial policies driving peri-urban dynamics in Hyderabad, India, in Cities, Vol. 24, No. 2, p. 95–109. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/cities
Kothari, Ashi, 2005,«Make the National Environment Policy Public Before Finalisation», Petition to M.Singh. http://www.toxicslink.org/alert-viewp.php?alertnum=9
Krishna & Gopal, 2002, «Corporate attack on public hearing process», in Toxics Dispatch, N°16, July
Kumar Kundu, Kunal, 2008, « Why India cannot sustain high economic growth », in Rediff Classifieds, May 29, http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2008/may/29india.htm
Le Galès, P., 1995, “Du gouvernement des villes à la gouvernance urbaine”, in Revue Française de Science Politique, n°45 (1), pp.59-60
Mawdsley, Emma, 2004, « India’s Middle Classes and the Environment », in Development and Change 35(1), Institute of Social Studies, pp. 79-103
Menon, Manju & Kohli, Kanchi, 2007, « Environmental Decision-making : whose Agenda ? », in Economic and Political Weekly, June 30, p.2490.
Muller, Pierre, 2000. “L’analyse cognitive des politiques publiques: vers une sociologie politique de l’action publique”, dans Revue française de science politique, vol. 50, n° 2, avril, p. 189-207.
Musselin, Christine, 2005, « Sociologie de l’action organisée et analyse des politiques publiques : deux approches pour un même objet ? », in Revue française de science politiques, vol. 55, n° 1, février, p. 51-71.
Nanda, Meera, 2005, « Science, scientists and science movements in India », in South Asia Citizens Wire, February 20, http://bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net /2005/002103.html (accessed July 4, 2007).
Narain, Sunita, « Préface » dans L’Etat de la Planète 2006, Paris, p. 16-19
Narain, Sunita, 2007a, « We don't smell the air », in Down to Earth, New Delhi : Centre for Science and Environment, October 10
Patra & Pradhan, 2005, Disaster Prevention and Management, vol. 14, N° 3, pp. 326-342
Prajapati, R., 2003, « Mockery of Environmental Laws: an assessment of Gujarat’s record in the implementation of environmental laws », in Combat Law, January
Purcell, Mark, 2003, “Citizenship and the Right to the Global City: Reimagining the Capitalist World Order”, in International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol.27.3, September, pp.564-90
Racine, J-L, 2006, « L’Inde émergente ou la sortie des temps postcoloniaux », Hérodote 120, 1er trimestre.
Raina, Vinod, 2004. “Social Movements in India”, in Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp. 320 – 327.
Rajamani, Lavanya, 2007, « Public Interest Environmental Litigation in India : Exploring Issues of Access, Participation, Equity, Effectiveness and Sustainability », in Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 19 No 3, pp. 293–321
Randeria, Shalini, 2003, “Footloose Experts vs. Rooted Cosmopolitans: Biodiversity Conservation, Transnationalisation of Law and Conflict among Civil Society Actors in India”, in Tsantsa, August, pp.74-85
Raina, Badri, 2008, “The Chieftain State of Gujarat: Where the Republic Ends”, June 14; http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/17908
Rishi, P., 1997. “Women and the Environment: from empowerment to sustainable development”, Kurukshetra XLV: (4&5), pp. 52-55.
Rodrik, Dani, and Subramanian, Arvind, 2005, « From Hindu Growth to Productivity Surge : the Mystery of the Indian Growth Transition », IMF Staff Paper 52(2) : 193-236).
Rousset Pierre, 2004. “Le Forum social mondial de Mumbaï. Rien n’était joué d’avance!”, texte de réflexion sur le processus indien du FSM, Paris :CRID, mars.
Roy, A., 2000, “India’s Greatest Planned Environmental Disaster: The Narmada Valley Dam Projects’’. Available at: http://www.narmada.org/ See also The Ecologist, Vol 2, N°4, Winter 2001
Scott, A., 1996, “Regional motors of the global economy”, in Futures 28, pp.391-411
Sheth, D.L. 2004. “Globalisation and new politics of micro movements”, in Economic and Political Weekly, January 3, p. 45
Singh, Misha; Shekhar Singh, 2006. “Transparency and the Natural Environment”, in Economic and Political Weekly April 15, p.1440.
Upadhyay, Videh, 2005 « Disaster management: Putting people first » in India Together, 06 April. http://www.indiatogether.org/2005/apr/vup-disaster.htm
Veen-Groot, van D. and P. Nijkamp, 1999, Globalisation, transport and the environment: new perspectives for ecological economics, in Ecological Economics N° 31, pp. 331-346.
Wei, Shang-jin, 2000, “How taxing is corruption on international investors?”, in The Review of Economics and Statistics, 82(1), 1-11.
Reports and Papers
3i Network, 2006, India Infrastructure Report 2006 : Urban Infrastructure, New Delhi : Oxford University Press
Anand, Sudhir; Amartya, Sen, 1994, Sustainable Human Development: Concepts and Priorities, Occasional Paper, UNDP
Asian Economic Integration: Vision of a New Asia’, organised by RIS : Tokyo, November 18-19, 2004.
Atul, Sood & Arora Bimal, The Political Economy of Corporate Responsibility in India, Technologie, entreprise et société (2000 - 2005), n°18
Banerjee, Niloy, 2003, A Note on Capabilities that make for Success at the Level of Community Based Organizations, European Centre for Development Policy Management,
Batra, Geeta; Daniel Kaufmann and Andrew H. W. Stone, 2003, Investment Climate Around the World: Voices of the Firms from the World Business Environment Survey, The World Bank, Washington DC. i-ix, 1-154.
Bhole, L. M., 2008, Hind Swaraj: About the Book and the Development Model, Paper, Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, 21 January, mimeo.
Cavaliere, Sandra, 2007, La citoyenneté : un outil analytique pour l’étude de la gouvernance, Itinéraires Notes et Travaux, n°79, Genève : IUED.
Centre de Recherche et d’Information pour le Développement (CRID), 2004. L’Inde en mouvement(s) : une radiographie des acteurs sociaux, Les Cahiers de la Solidarité, Paris.
Chaubey, P.K., 2008, Sustainable Development: Issues and Implications, Indian Institute of Public Administration, Conference Paper, IIT Mumbai, 22 January 2008, mimeo
Confederation of Indian Industry & Japanese External Trade Organization & Departement of Industrial Policy and Promotion, 2007, Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor : Executive Summary, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India, June
Corporate Responsibility for Environment Protection (CREP), 2006, Senior Officials Meeting on 3R Initiatives, Ministry of Environment and Forests Government of India New Delhi
Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, Ministry of Commerce & Industry; Ministry of Economy Trade & Industry, Government of Japan, 2007, Development of Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, Concept Paper, New Delhi, August 22.
Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor Development Corporation Limited (DMICDC), 2008, Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor: Status & Opportunities, Project Concept, Tokyo, February 18th
Deutsche Bank, 2008, Corporate Social Responsibility Report 2007, Frankfurt am Main : Deutsche Bank AG. http://www.db.com/csr
Dufour, P., 2001, Marginalization in a post-welfare regime. New forms of representation and a new political process design, Prepared for Workshop #5 “Governance and Democratic Legitimacy” of the 29th Joint Sessions of Workshops - ECPR April 6-11, Grenoble, France; http://www.fas.umontreal.ca/POL/cohesionsociale
Government of India, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Research, Reference and Training Division ed., 2007, India 2007, New Delhi: Publications Division, 51st Ed. http://www.publicationsdivision.nic.in
Grossman, G.M. and A.B. Krueger, 1991, Environmental impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement, Working paper n° 3914, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, November. Http://www.nber.org/papers/w3914.pdf
Guptara, Prabhu, 2002, “The Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility in India”, in Corporate Responsibility: A View from India, The EU-India CSR Network, Brussels, Belgium, http://www.southasian.org.uk/intro_social.html
Hochraich, Diana; Sindzingre, Alice; Hay, Françoise; Milelli, Christian, 2007, The Indian Economy in the Era of Globalization, Center for Asian Studies Occasional Papers, n°26, June,Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva, Switzerland.
Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services (IL&FS), 2007, Concept Paper Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor, New Delhi, August. http://www.ilfsindia.com/downloads/bus_rep/DMIC_Concept_Report_10Aug2007.pdf
Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services (IL&FS), 2007, Environmental Information Centre (EIC) Innovation Report, NewDelhi
Japan International Cooperation Agency, 2002, Country Profile on Environment : India, Planning an Evaluation Department, February. http://www.jica.go.jp/english/global/env/profiles/pdf/11.pdf
Kohli, Kanchi and Menon, Manju, 2005, Eleven Years of Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 1994 : How Effective Has It Been ? Kalpavriksh Environmental Action Group in collaboration with Just Environment Trust and Environment Justice Initiative, New Delhi: Combat Law Publications
Kothari; Moghe and Pathak, 2005, Annual Report, Kalpavriksh Environmental Action Group, New Delhi:
Her Majesty's Treasury, 2006, The case for open markets: how increased competition can equip Europe for global change, April, Norwich, UK. http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk./media/9/0/eer_openmarket070406.pdf
Hirway, Indira, 1999, “Dynamics of Development in Gujarat: Some Issues», Working Paper I, Ahmedabad: Centre for Development Alternatives, October
McAdam Doug, Sidney Tarrow and Charles Tilly. 2000. Dynamics of Contention. Preliminary version, photocopy, January.
Ministry of Commerce&Industry (MCI), Department of Industrial Policy&Promotion, 2007, Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, Report, New Delhi, August 22, p.5-7
Ministry of Power, Bureau of Energy Efficiency and Ministry of Environment and Forest, 2007, India: Addressing Energy Security and Climate Change, Government of India, October
O’Neill, J. and Poddar, Tushar, 2008, “Ten Things for India to Achieve its 2050 Potential”, in Goldman Sachs Global Economics Paper N° 169, June 16. https://portal.gs.com
Parikh, Jyoti, 2004, Environmentally Sustainable Development in India, Integrated Research and Action for Development (IRADe), India
Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti, 2000, Golden Corridor : Digging our own grave, Bharuh: India. http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/aid/web/activities/talks/michael-readinglist/IPT.pdf
Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti, 2007, Gujarat: Investment zone or dumping ground?, Press Release, Vadodara, 29 April.
Prakash, Sanjeev, 1999, "What are the costs of globalization ? On Integrating Institutions, Homogenizing Knowledge", ETI Paper, New Delhi.
Prakash, Sanjeev, 2002, « Social Capital and the Rural Poor:What Can Civil Actors and Policies Do? », in Social Capital and Poverty Reduction : Which role for the civil society organizations and the State? Paris : UNESCO, pp.47-62
Prud’homme, R., 2004, Infrastructure and Development, Paper, Annual Bank Conference on Development Economics, Washington, May 3-5
Raha Subir, The First Annual Report for 2004-05, Global Compact Society (India)
Roy, Joyashree, 2006, “The Economics of Climate Change: A Review of Studies in the Context of South Asia with a Special Focus on India”, in The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, London.Http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk./media/5/0/roy.pdf
Singh, Manmohan, 2008, «Text of Prime Minister's address at ASSOCHAM Annual General Meeting», June 2nd, Available at: http://www.khabrein.info (consulted on June 3rd, 2008)
Social Watch India, 2007, « Citizens’ Report on Governance and Development 2007, New Delhi : Sage Publications
Srinivasan, T.N., 2003, « Indian Economic Reforms : A Stock-taking », Paper 190, Stanford Center for International Development, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
World Bank, 2006, India Strengthening Institutions for Sustainable Growth Country Environmental Analysis, South Asia Environment and Social Development Unit, Report No. 38292, December 22, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INDIAEXTN/Resources/295583-1169456822314/India_CEA_Report_FINAL_Dec.pdf
Conferences
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, “Development Through Planning, Market, or Decentralization?”, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay, Powai, 21-23 January 2008
Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), “National Consultation Critiquing the Current Judicial Trends on Environment Law”, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, 23&24 February 2008
Interviews
Mr Claude Alvares, moderator, National consultation critiquing the current judicial trends on environment law, Human rights law network, New Delhi, 23 February 2008
Dr PK Chaubey, Indian Institute of Public Administration, IIT Mumbai, 22 January 2008
Dr Indira Hirway, Director of the Center for Development Alternatives, Ahmedabad, 29 January 2008
Dr Pardha Mukhopadhyag, Centre for Policy Research, Delhi, February 8, 2008
Mme Medha Patkar, activist of ‘Save the Narmada Movement’, Delhi, 24 February 2008
Mr Rohit Prajapati, head of ‘Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti’, Vadodara, 26 January 2008
Mr Gurpal Singh, Deputy Director, Confederation of Indian Industry, September 01, 2007 (via email)
Mrs Monali Zeya Hazra, Deputy coordinato, Industry and Environment, CSE, Tughalabad, 9 February 2008
Internet
Sites of United Nations
GIEC and UNEP
http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syrfren-ch/spm.pdf
http://www.greenfacts.org
http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/ipcc/wg14ar-review.htm
http://www.millenniumassessment.org
http://www.delaplanete.org in collaboration with Worldwatch Institute
OMM
http://www.wmo.ch
World Wide Fund
http://www.wwfindia.org/help/bi/index.cfm: site on ‘business and industry’ in India
World Bank
http://web.worldbank.org/
Sites of Ministry of Environment and Forests:
http://www.moef.gov.in;
http://envfor.nic.in
National Environment Policy 2006
http://envfor.nic.in/nep/nep2006.html
Central Pollution Control Board:
http://www.cpcb.nic.in
The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy
http://mnes.nic.in/
Sites on environmental research in India :
http://www.cseindia.org: site du Centre for Science and Environment
http://www.cfda.ac.in: site of Centre for Development Alternatives:
Sites of Environmental Support Groups:
http://www.downtoearth.org.in
http://www.esgindia.org/
http://www.irn.org/
http://www.emeraldinsight.com
http://www.toxicslink.org/
http://www.indiatogether.org/environment
http://www.blacksmithinstitute.org/
Sites on India environmental legislation :
http://www.ecolex.org: site listing 480 Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)
http://www.mse.ac.in/envistamil/legis.htm: Environmental Legislations, acts and laws ; Environmental Impact Assessments, and court judgments
http://cpreec.org: has a data bank of environmental laws, notifications and judicial pronouncements
Sites on Indian infrastructure :
www.infrastructure.gov.in
Sites on Corporate social responsibility :
http://www.globalcompactindia.com
http://www.ethicalcorp.com/
http://www.csmworld.org: site of Centre for Social Markets
http://emagazine.managementnext.com/
Sites of Indian newspapers and online news:
http://www.sacw.net (South Asia Citizens Wire)
http://pib.nic.in
http://www.infochangeindia.org/
http://www.businesswireindia.com
http://www.rediff.com
http://www.tehelka.com
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com
http://www.aniin.com
http://www.indiainfo.com
[1] 2400 calories per person per day in the country, 2100 in the city.
[2] http://www.agora21.org/rio92/A21_html/Delario/
[3] According to the group of intergovernmental experts on climat evolution, weighted temperature evolution for the end of the 22nd century is bound to rise to 0.47°C.
[4] http://www.teriin.org/dsds/2008/speaker.htm (15 May 2008)
[5] See the « Handigodu Syndrome of Malnad » where contaminated crabs eaten by villagers led to serious bone malformations. The Hindu, Sunday October 2, 1977, pp.5-7
[6] Over a thousand large companies in India, http://www.bis.org.in/ (consulted on Nov. 23 2007)
[7] Office of Development Commissioner. Available: http://www.smallindustryindia.com/ssiindia/statistics/economic.htm
[8] Over a thousand large companies in India, http://www.bis.org.in/ (consulted on Nov. 23 2007)
[9] http://www.narmada.org/debates/gail/gail.open.letter.html (08 January 2008)
No comments:
Post a Comment