THE CONSERVATION GAUNTLET!

Sab ka Vikas ! 

The clarion cry for economic development rings clear and loud. The accompanying "veena" of sustainability, environment, inclusion is soft  and muted - yet (hopefully!) persistent. The governance framework around environmental issues is confusing and cluttered. Environment Ministry, States & Centre, National Green Tribunal, Wild life Board, various legislation and their justice-ability, Environmental clearances  - all are into overlap, contradiction and even conflict mode. There is also new office memoranda contradicting existing legislation. 

The environmentalists and conservationists, especially NGOs, are running for cover and the activists are confused and fragmented even more than ever. The fear of the new sedition law and the "foreign funding" swords are having an impact on candour.

While it is possible to lament the crumbling of a known ( maybe ineffective ) governance and monitoring framework of the past, and wring our hands in despair and despondency , it is equally possible to conceive opportunities of immense value in the present apparent chaos.

Hitherto, the three legs of sustainability have been anchored by separate advocates of each. The economic development voice has come from industry, land developers, infra companies, builders, investors and the financial community. The community and social concerns of the excluded, "backward" and secluded sections have been voiced by activists seeking to mobilise popular movements and NGOs seeking predominantly rights, benefits and choices resulting in the socio-economic outcomes for these sections. The environmental  concerns have tended to be a combination of conservation NGOs, and PIL activists seeking to pressure or influence the decision makers to make preferred choices.  The "red lines" of each of the these three areas ( while the subject of much disagreement!) were reasonably clear hitherto. 

Now we have a situation where the environmental redlines are clearly being dismantled and shifted into the discretionary domain of policy makers belonging to the political class. Coastal regulations, River regulations,  Environmental regulations in general are being redrawn in a manner that is leaving a lot of people aghast at these choices. Several so-called wildlife bodies, like the National Board for Wildlife, have cleared more than 100 projects in one meetings—and hundreds of projects so far—raising fears amongst conservationists that these decisions have been taken without application of mind. The banner of "all this for economic development and inclusion" seems to some people a "goebbelsian truth" !! In the social space the apparent "paternalism" of political policy makers and thinly disguised agendas are the subject of polarised and deliberately confusing debate.

While the rhetoric of each has tended to claim to be integrating economic, social and environmental aspects in their narrative, the reality seems to be more of a polarised discourse characterised by an "either- or" solution seeking. The role of media anchors who have thrived on TRPs derived from polarising and strident high decibel, over-talking, 10-participant-10-minute so-called prime time debates has certainly not helped!

Most science based conservationists who work in the field and do real high quality study of the environments and holistic landscapes, tend to be thoughtful in integrating the community (socially); the economics of development impact and needs,as much as their deep and serious study of the elements of the landscapes. This is now their time! 

It is indeed time for the integration of social, economic and environmental science for integrated solutions that truly balance all three. The key is not to agree with one or the other view in isolation, but to ensure that there is a balanced and factual, science based discourse in the public space for the most appropriate and optimal choice making.

The time has come to widen the deep specialisation of "environmentalists" from specie focus and elements to move to depth and width. Example - Mumbai airport - lets not focus on ten good reasons why the airport should not be built, but on ten ways in which we can best balance the environmental needs, the economic compulsions and the social equity of what we do and how we do the airport!  It is essential to identify that the project will put at risk the marinescape / landscape for 40,000 migratory birds and may significantly impact threatened and near threatened species, without obfuscating facts. Another Example - NH7. Can we recommend ten mitigation measures that will balance the development benefits with the need to retain, even enhance the viable corridors for the apex predator to move from the almost isolated protected areas across more than one state ?

We need to embed economic and social science capability in our conservationists to be able to crunch the numbers, data and analysis to understand "balancing" and "solutionising" viable ways forward. One of the biggest challenges posed in such an approach is - mitigation costs money and the advocates of development  won't spend more than a token amount on this! The question can then be - can we mobilise different recommendations of PPP or CSR or other funding of mitigation ? diversion of un-used CAMPA funds? My point is can we be creative advocates of "viable" solutions from all three view points? 

On issues like NH7 - can any conservation activist, NGO or institution, even now, do an analysis that demonstrates the economic value of NH7, the community benefits, and the environmental issues in an integrated manner ( not A+B+C = D!!!) and then go on to recommend a balanced solution which optimises benefits in all three areas along with costs and funding suggestions?

What will it take to develop the New Age Conservationists who can deliver such value to the EARTH and its future ? Can we move from small steps like propagating Conservation Economics and landscape environmental  studies (necessary and good steps) to building an integrated capacity for understanding and solutionising for an India-relevant approach?

Some organisations like BNHS are picking this up and have already  started a pioneering  programme to groom young scientists to meet these challenges.

The Gauntlet is in our face.