Development Vs Environment Protection

The awareness of the need to protect and preserve the atmosphere has grown manifold since the first UN conference on environment was held in Stockholm in 1972. So has technology and the legal framework to take care of pollutants. But environmental degradation, as measured in terms of the emission of greenhouse gases, deterioration of water and air quality and degeneration of the earths natural endowments, has tended to worsen.

India is no exception, though the sensitivity to the need for environment conservation in this country dates back to antiquity. The Vedas are replete with hymns proclaiming all the assets of the earth, including the flora and fauna, as objects of worship and hence worthy of protection. Ancient Indian society took pride in promoting vegetation in the vicinity of human habitations even when the population pressure on the earths resou-rces was none-too-formidable.

While developed countries are now in a position to incorporate pollution control measures as an essential part of project formulation, many developing countries are finding it difficult to do so because of its cost-push impact. Development and environmental protection are, consequently, coming into sharp conflict, not only within the Third World but also between the developing and developed nations.

This conflict has been brought out vividly in this book, which is the 21st volume in the series of studies sponsored under the Indo-Dutch Programme on Alternatives in Development (IDPAD). The programme is jointly implemented by the New Delhi-based Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) and the Hague-based Institute of Social Science Research in Developing Countries (IMWOO). The studies provide in-depth analysis of developments in this field and their implications for policy planning.

This discord between development and environment protection reached a flashpoint at the recent global summit on climate change at Kyoto, where the developing countries successfully resisted the US and its allies bid to force all nations, irrespective of their stage of development, to agree to a common emission reduction target. The developing countries minced no words in pointing out the stark reality that when the North was in a comparative stage of development as todays South, it could more easily externalise the costs of development, as environmental concern then was minimal. The South should also be allowed to come up to that level before imposing any effusion reduction target.

India has, however, tried to make a conscious effort right from the beginning to strike a balance between poverty alleviation and economic uplift. Its track record in pollution control has been fairly impressive. Besides enacting various legislation, it went to the extent of changing its statutes book by adding a new Article 48(A) to the Directive Principles of State Policy in 1976 which states: The state shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. In a new chapter in the Constitution entitled Fundamental Duties, Article 51 A (g) imposes a similar onus on every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures. Shifting of environment protection from the state list to the concurrent list was another big step.

Besides these measures, the book also lists the following among the strengths of Indias pollution control effort: comprehensive set of ambient and emission standards; important role for public interest litigation; and wide range of enforcement instruments. Some of these strengths are common to both India and the Netherlands. The two countries also share the lack of effective implementation of pollution reduction tools, especially in the case of small-scale industrial and other units.

The book underscores the vast scope that economic instruments possess for promoting environment protection. The measures include water cess, depreciation allowance, investment allowance, tax exemptions, soft loans, etc. Monitoring would, of course, have to be stepped up to improve the efficacy of all these instruments. Finally, the book expresses confidence that this can be done as the political mood is in favour of clean environment, and voluntary bodies are putting relentless pressure to keep up this spirit.