FACTS againest MYTHS V0L-I-3-OCTOBER-1993.pdf
Media
- extracted text
-
COMMENT
i Vs
*
Z*. ir '•
Environmental-Population Myths
<
In the on-going N orth-South
debate, so many myths have been
generated that place the blame for
the destruction of the environment
^aiid depletion of resources on the
people of the South. Much of this
debate, on environment and
population, is mired in a sterile
effort to find an obvious and
convincing scapegoat on which to
peg th* blame for the myriad of
confronting our planet:
deforestation, soil erosion,
^^sertification, ozone depletion,
It has become fashionable and
even respectable to point the
accusing finger at the "monstrous"
juggernaut — population growth
in the South — the root cause of
icach and • every problem
confronting the globe. It is
considered
a
threat
to
sustainability
because if
consumption levels
of the
North are linked to it, global
resource requirement would
become exceedingly large.
Unlimited population growth do beyond the simplistic numbers
put a severe strain on the resources game .
and the ‘carrying capacity' of the
earth. It is however fallacious to Undeniably, there is urgent need
conclude that population growth for development, in eradicating
‘per se' is the main culprit. The rise poverty as also curbing population
in human numbers is not a ‘sui growth. Such development
generis" phenomenon but rather the however needs to be sustainable.
result of the particular social, Production of goods and services
economic, ecological and political require resources and often
dynamics of society. Population generates certain undesirable^
size and its rate of growth in arty joint-products along with desired
society is a function of its goods and services.
Ultimately,
underlying socio-cultural and however, it is the production
economic reality. Any serious process that generates .the
effort, therefore, in "controlling" particular consumption pattern.
the "population explosion" must Stress has therefore to be on the
begin by recognising this and other type of production-consumption
related facts instead of just patterns, their resource contents
stressing population figures which and
their
environmental
is only one aspect of the whole consequences. The solution to the
debate. When tlje issue is linked whole environment
crisis
with the environment in general therefore does not lie in controlling
and resources in particular, both population growth but in the social
the quantity and quality aspects control ' of
production
need to be examined. Any attempt consumption patterns of the rich in
therefore in analysing and solving the-North,.
this issue through the reduction of
human numbers will have to go
( For Private Circulation Only)
MYTH
Population Growth Is Responsible For The Worldwide Environmental
Degradation.
FACT
The point of poverty and population growth being the cause of environment degradation is patently false.
There is no evidence from anywhere to suggest that poverty causes degradation and that high population
causes poverty. In reality it is the structural inequality and erosion of access to natural resources that
accentuates poverty. History clearly shows that
population growth and incidence of poverty are
inter-connected. Once interventions aimed at eradicating poverty begin to succeed there is significant
impact on the rate of population growth. Hence, poverty is not a cause of, but consequence of, environmental
degradation and investments in human resource along with equitable access to natural resources, can avert
these trends.
The main issue therefore is not population growth. Wasteful and unnecessary consumption is the main
culprit. To this, the barb that "all these people" in the South will cat up all the resources is a racist underlying
reaction. If one person in the North consumes 8 times more than a person in the South, there would be fewer
people in the North! For each person cut down in the North, consumption comes down by 8 times.
—
The production-consumption processes linkage is therefore the main issue. The North, especially the U.S.,
argue that consumption is a personal matter. It is a matter of personal choice and (individual) rights, and
that the State cannot intervene with consumption. Yet, at international fora they maintain that population
control is something that the State should enforce! So, where is human rights and respect for people of the
South? Consumption is a personal right, but how many children a family should have, what they wish to
do with their bodies is international and World Bank policy?! That itself is a basic contradiction.
.
Consumption levels therefore of the rich North constitute a major threat to the environment. The North has
only 24 per cent of the world's population, but their share in global consumption of various commodities
extends from 50 to 90 percent. Even basic products like cereals, milk and meat arc consumed by
industrialized countries in a range from 48 percent to 72 percent. Its consumption share for other products
are 60 percent for fertilizers, 81 percent for iron and steel, 85 percent for chemicals and 92 percent for cars.
This also means that their per capita consumption is three to eight limes that of the South for items of baslfc**
needs and more than 20 times for chemicals and vehicles. The North’s world’s share of energy consumption
is 75 percent.
g
Obviously, environmental degradation is proportional to these consumption levels. The North has been
responsible from 1950 to 1988 for about 70 percent of the annual emissions of carbon dioxide and 77 percent
of cumulative carbon dioxide emissions. The per capita carbon emissions of the rich North are seven times
that of the South.
In terms of global food (meat) consumption, the North gets 40% of the calories from fat. These 1.25 billion
people eat 3 times as much fat per peison as the rest of 4 million. Indirectly the meat eating quarter of
humanity consumes nearly 40% of world’s grain — grain that fattens the livestock they eat. Meat production
is behind the major part of the environmental stress induced by the present global agricultural systems,
fromsoil erosion to over- pumping of underground water. In the extreme case of American beef, production
of 1 kg of steak requires 5 kg of grain and the energy equivalent of 9 litres of petrol, apart from soil erosion,
water consumption, pesticide and fertiliser runoff, ground water depletion, and emission of green house
methane.
Beyond the effects of livestock production, the affluent diet ring; up an ecological bill through its heavy
dependence on long distance transport. North Europeans eat lettuce trucked from Greece and decorate the
tables with flowers from Kenya. Japanese eat turkey from the US and ostrich from Australia. One fourth
2
of the grapes eaten in the US is grown in Chile, 11000 km away. This far-flung agri-business food system
is only partly a product of agronomic forces. It is also a result of farm policies and health standards that
favour large produces, massive government subsidies for western irrigation water, and a national highway
system that makes trucking economical by transferring the tax burden from truckers to the highway users.
In raw materia] the consumption the same pattern emerges. About 1 billion rural people subsist on the local
biomass collected from the immediate environment Most of what they use each could be self-replenishing
renewal resources. Unfortunately, because they are often pushed by landlessness and population growth
into fragile, unproductive ecosystems, their basic needs are hardly met.
In terms of consumer expenditure, 4% of goods in the U.S. covers packaging, i.e. $225 a year. Packaging,
in this throw-away of economy, is an end in itself. Disposables proliferate at an incredible rate. Likewise
the Japanese use 30 million "disposable" single-roll cameras each year, and the British dump 2.6 billion
diapers. Americans toss away 180 million razors annually, enough paper and plastic plates and cup to feed
the world a picnic 6 times a year and enough aluminium cans to make 6000 DC10 air-crafts.
In the context of population figures what ii is of greater relevance and even more revealing is the concept
of Consumption-or Pollution-Multiplied Population (CMP,PMP). An average American consumes over20
times the resources of the average person in the South. The US population of 250 million multiplied by 20
gives a CMP of five billion, compared to the total population of 4 billion of the South, giving a CMP of 4
billion.
„'
The consumption of paper in the US is 137 times that of India. The paper PMP, then is 34 billion compared
to 850 million for India. Similarly, a Japanese earns at least 120 times more income than and average Nepali
worker. The impact of al) this alone on deforestation is evident.
If one calculates the CMP or PMP -- in relation to the consumption rates of the poor themselves — rather
than on the basis of national averages, the results are more glaring. Since neither cars not CFCs are used
by them, the CMP and PMP for these commodities approaches infinity for any of the countries of the North.
Further, assuming that a person, from the rich North consumes 50 times more resources (which s/he easily
docs) than an average person from the South, then the effective population of Germany would be over 4000
* rtiillion (its actual population being around 80 million) and the US would be over 12,400 (its actual
population being around 250 million) in,terms of consumption.
I*
Thus consumption patterns of the rich North including those of the rich in the South is significant not only
by its quantitative implications, but by its qualitative character too. It is (he insatiable desires for ever
increasing material comforts of the economically affluent — i.e., their mass consumption life styles and
consumption patterns — that lead to severe degradation of the environment and depletion of resources.
MYTH
The Poor Of The South Are Destroying The Forests And The Environment At
Large,
FACT
Development agencies, including the FAO, the World Bank, among others, all tend to view the poor as
primary factor in the ecological crisis. But like the Agenda 21 they all fail to explain why poverty exists in
the first place, and thus fail adequately to examine contemporary economic structures and the role, for
instance that timber companies, ranching syndicates and TNCs have had both in creating and maintaining
social inequalities in the degradation of the environment.
Evidently, the destraction and degradation of the forests in the world stem not only from the present
economic system but also in the nexus between the political elites of the South and Western corporate
MM
interests. In regions where privilege, inequality and subsequent poverty are rife, and where repressive
regimes are continually supported by the American administration, TNCs virtually have a free hand in
implementing ‘development’ projects that are causing widespread forest destruction. The economic benefits
of those projects goes to the importing countries (the North) and to wealthy elites within the South, not to
the people of the forested regions who become even more pauperized. To illustrate , Dr. Manmohan Singh,
Union Finance Minister, on June 17, 1992 delivered the Foundation Day Lecture of the Society for the
Promotion of Wasteland Development on the theme, "Environment and New Economic Policies". Apart
from "poverty" and the "lack of development" he also stressed the "uncontrolled economic development"
as the other factor to the economic crisis.
If the current ‘regulated* model of development is causing "uncontrolled" mining of the country’s natural
resource base (e.g. at Palamau in Bihar, Kota in Rajasthan, etc.,) then this devastation is bound to increase
in geometric progression with the advent of the new ‘De- regulated’ economic policy.
He further stated that, "The survival strategies of the poor, particularly their search for food, fodder, fuel
and shelter, often leads to over utilization of available resources, thereby accentuating the problem of
environmental degradation".
It is an overstatement that the survival strategy of the poor that lead to over utilisation of available natural
resources and erosion, thereby of our natural resource base. Infact, it is the centralized policy of the
Government to use the country’s forest resources as a main revenue earner which causes this erosion. It is
the forest department which claims the ownership of one-fourth of the country ’s total landmark. And
finally, it is the state (controlling and developing India’s forests, dams, hydel power stations, mines, roads
and large part of its industiy) which is not just the protector but also the most feared destroyer of our
country’s environment. And. lest we forget, the adivasis of Bastar — like most adivasis the world over -had protected their forest over centuries.
A World Bank project for so-called forest development, of tropical pines here, became a major cause for
deforestation in the region. This project came to India as the Bank’s Group’s first intervention in Forestry,
the Madhya Pradesh Forestry Technical Assistance Project (Credit 608 - IN, December 1975) and was
directed primarily towards the development of plantation for pulp and paper industry. This project was part
of the trend to totally convert natural forests to commercial plantation resulting in the biomass produced r^o
longer benefiting the adivasis. The adivasis sustenance base in cane and bamboo for basket weaving,
mangoes, tamarind, jack fruit, mahua and edible berries were all destroyed when natural forests were
replaced by monoculture plantation of tropical pine. These trees were worse than useless for local needs.
They provide no food or fodder. Villagers cannot use them for thatching. Above all these trees absorb
huge quantities of water and put toxin into the soil. In surrounding farmland, wells and streams dry up and
crops cannot grow. In Karnataka alone, 75,000 hectares of agricultural land have been destroyed by
eucalyptus.
The Karnataka Pulpwood Limited, a joint-sectorcompany owned by the Karnataka Government and Haribar
Polyfibres of the Birlas has been given the above acreage of revenue land, forest lands and common lands
in six districts of the State for captive plantation of these trees and other fast growing species for the benefit
of the Limited Company. This has led to over 5 lakh people being deprived of their essential needs like
fodder, fuel, small, timber, manure, raw material and fruits.
Quote
fact
To begin with, for the poor in the South, environment is a necessary survival base, not a luxury or of any
aesthetic value. Forests, grasslands, rivers, have been the source of life and livelihood foradivasis, nomads
and fisherfolk. This background is necessary to bear in mind, for instance, in trying to understand current
economic issues especially in the context of the Government liberalising the economy and subsequently
ratifying the Dunkel Draft proposals. The mounting debt burden and widening trade deficits are being given
as reasons for recent cuts in tariffs, easing of curbs on foreign investors, removal of restrictions on imports
and removal of subsidies. "Export or Perish" is the message that Government has been repeating from all
fora.
The boost to export for earning foreign exchange will mean an even greater pressure on our natural resources.
4b More and more of these resources would be directed to tradeable items rather than for local consumption.
Already, over 60 percent of the exports are natural resource based. These depend heavily on primary
commodities such as coffee, jute, timber, marine products, ores and minerals. Since the social and
environmental costs are not covered in the price of exports, such tilt towards liberalized trade will push the
country to an indiscriminate exploitation of these resources.
With the definite possibility of the Dunkel proposals taking effect, global competition for agricultural output
will intensify forcing to bring more and more prime land under cultivation to step up production for exports.
Increasing production would mean greatcruse of chemicals, pesticides, clearing more forests and opening
Up hitherto protected stretches of land for enhancing exports. With fanners being called upon to earn foreign
exchange, massive shift to cash crop production is certain, drastically reducing areas for staple food
cultivation. Small and marginal farmers, lacking resources to take to export-oriented production, would be
pushed out of agriculture losing out to agri-business interests. Among the several proposals cleared for
foreign investments, large number of these relate to food processing.
The elevation of agriculture to the status of industry would displace small fanners, many of whom would
bf compelled to encroach forest areas leading to further deforestation. Export-oriented agriculture, being
capital intensive, will not be able to absorb the new entrants to labour force, many of whom would then
swell the ranks of the poor in urban slums. Ensuring implementation of environmental and safely safeguards
will become more difficult in pressurizing industries to ensure that they do not violate safety standards.
With SAP leading to the domination of more and more areas of industrial development by TNCs, the cha nces
of ensuring social safeguards are likely to be reduced, specially at a time when there is further effort to shift
more hazardous and polluted industries away from the developed countries as openly advocated by a senior
World Bank official. The situation of relatively less safety regulations here is evident from the recent
discourses that carbaryl pesticide is still being formulated in Bhopal.
With the inflow of foreign investment gradually increasing it is unlikely that this investment will be carefully
monitored from the angle of avoiding unacceptable risks to environmental ruin and various hazards. This
is because the government is so anxious to attract foreign investors that it is unlikely to pester them too
much by questions about the environment and safety fosition of their ventures.
There is also a tremendous pressure to utilise the pending aid at a rapid pace. Piled up unutilized aid brings
adverse publicity for the borrowing countiy in the aid bazaar and so there is great pressure to rush up the
utilization of this aid. One reason for the delay of the projects is the preview in the acquisition of land on
which people are already living/working and the possibilities of other adverse effects. Now in the name of
speeding up the utilization of this aid, problems of the people facing eviction and related environmental
problems arc likely to be given a short shrift, specially in the situation when foreign investors and donors
5
are anxious to push some hazardous projects.
SAP gives a call for making the maximum effort to increase exports. A lot of things can be excused if a
project happens to be favorable from the point of increasing exports. Hence the havoc that may be caused
to land, water and air resources by such projects is likely to be tolerated.
Efforts to increase marine exports, other food exports and also the products of some high polluting/hazardous
industries can cause very extensive damage to the environment. Some of the mega-projects which are most
controversial from the point of environmental side effects, the environmental efforts run the risks of being
created as a non-priority area and thereby subjected to heavy budget cuts. For instance in a recent paper
by Miloon Kothari and Ashish Kothari, "Allocation for the prevention and control of pollution have been
out (in real terms) by 35.5 per cent at a time when pollution is likely to increase. Rural sanitation
programmes have suffered a cut of 46.8 per cent and the rural, water supply of the water mission 39.3 per
cent .of its budget. Other programmes which have suffered are wasteland development (down by 23.5
percent) and promotion of non-conventional energy sources (26.3 percent) but the heaviest reduction (61
percent) is in the biomass development programme."
References:
1.
Brown, L R, "State of the World", W W Norton and Co., New
York, 1991.
2. Pereira, W & Seabrook, J, "Asking the Earth", The Other
India Press, Goa, 1992.
The Endangered Rainforests, Vol. 1, World Resources
Movement, Penang, 1992.
4. Multinational Monitor, USA, July 1992.
3.
5.
6.
Third World Resurgence, Penang, August 1992.
Land and People, PRIA, No. 16, New Delhi, 1992.
NOTE: Inadvertantly an error, on abortion in Isam (Pg. 2) appeared in the last issue. It was incorrectly
stated that Islam like the Catholic Church prohibits abortion. The fact is that in Islam abortion is
prohibited after 120 days except to save mother’s health.
Facts Against Myths is a monthly
bulletin of factual information on a
number of development myths and
fallacies,
etc.,
including
information against disinformation
campaigns, propaganda and
canards spread by communal and
fundamentalist forces.
Printed Matter
Book Post
Produced & Published by:
Vikas Adhyayan Kendra (VAK)
D-1, Shivdham, 62, Link Rd.
Malad (W), Bombay 64
Tel. No. 8822850/8898662
Fax No, (022) 642 2110
6
Not viewed