Many Lives, No Masters

Sorry people, those very few who had been reading this blog of mine. I know I am late. Two months is a long time in blogosphere.

Well, what do you expect? The last two months have been hectic, to say the least. I switched jobs in June, and since then, have found no time, but then, gained valuable experience.

I have spent time in Assam in a remote place where there are about 13 extremist groups, and while I was there, 14 people got killed in violence. Then there were floods. One of the reports says about 29 people died from that. No electricity for long stretches of time, high humidity, lots of mosquitoes and bugs, no internet access, very weak or at many times no phone network coverage at all, very small and dingy and ill maintained hotel rooms.

And then I looked around myself, the beautiful landscapes, extremely warm people, great food………life never fails to surprise you with its diversity, all in one place. I sometimes feel so privileged at working in the development sector, for I get to see life from up close. Life, which takes me to luxurious hotels, cocktail parties, meeting with high flying people……..and then, just like its another life, to paddy fields where I get knee deep into mud, meet struggling farmers barely managing two square meals a day, walk through dingy urban slums, eat at some roadside stall sweating in the heat and driving away flies……it really seems that I am leading two lives.

So, forgive me if I do not write often. Writing a blog takes a third life, and right now its difficult managing the first two. Wish there were wizards to manage your lives, just like you have them in blogs to design the templates. Without them, life is meandering. I certainly am not the master of my life, and I wonder if there is any master to to the multiple lives I lead.

Should Social Networking Sites Like Orkut be Banned?

The recent happenings in Mumbai have once again raised questions over the existence of social networking sites like orkut.com. While the Shiv Sainiks have made violent protests against the use of these sites because of some derogatory remark against its party supremo and against Shivaji, the Mumbai Police also seems to have been keen on getting the site banned.

The orkut site has been very popular lately, and has been attracting many users who do social networking, meet and keep in touch with old friends, develop new friendships, discuss issues, voice their opinions on issues they feel about strongly or just have fun. There are communities on orkut ranging from ‘Social Development’, ‘Venture Capitalists’, ‘I love My Dad’, ‘I love Maggi’, ‘I want to kill Himesh Reshammiya’ etc. etc. etc. Here comes the thing of freedom of expression again, and the site promotes that.

Personally, I have found wonderful use of this site. Though I do not participate much in the communities of orkut, I have found many old, long lost friends on orkut, who I had never expected to meet again, and getting back in touch with them has been an absolute pleasure. Again, keeping in touch with your friends and associates or just dropping a short message has never been easier. One never forgets birthdays anymore, as they are listed on orkut. We even had a small reunion of school friends who had lost touch over time but again got back through orkut.

That was the good part. But there is an ugly side to it too. There are many emails floating around, many news articles from time to time, telling us about unpleasant incidents that happened over the sites. A girl and a boy meeting through orkut and setting up a date, where the girl is later found murdered in a hotel room, or about terrorists being active on the sites, harassment, sexual threats, misuse of pictures, intimidation are quite commonplace. Then there are offensive communities. There was a community, ‘I Hate India’, which showed the picture of burning of the Indian flag. Also there are porn communities, communities spreading hatred or violence and all such sorts. Now here it is that how far can such freedom of expression be taken?

Is banning the site a solution to all these problems? To some extent, maybe yes. You cannot, in the name of freedom of expression, allow such things to go on which puts to risk the privacy, safety and lives of people. But then these are things that happen in the society, with or without orkut. Even without orkut, there were still crimes in the society. As in everything else, nothing works more than self censorship. One should choose for oneself whether one wants privacy and be a member of such a site or not, or put one’s picture in the site or not. Also, the discretion to go out with someone that one has met only online is exercised by the person who goes out, and as in all cases, restrain has to be maintained in that, and such cases happen not only when people go out with someone they have met on orkut or elsewhere. Infact, one cannot put the entire blame on orkut for all the mishaps that have happened.

So, what is the solution? I guess banning the site is not the solution. Then even emails and mobile phones and cameras and many many such things will need to be banned because these have also been the medium of many crimes and harassments. The solution is not in banning the site and gagging the freedom of expression, but then for the promoters of the site to come up with as many possible ways that the misuse of the site can be stopped, like preventing the photos to be easily copied from the site, which has been one of the easiest way of harassing and impersonating people.

Forest SEZs, Serious Environmental Zatka

The Union government has recently taken an initiative to create special economic zones (SEZ) by leasing out degraded forest land to industry. While on the face of it, it seems like a great idea, is beneficial to everyone and good for the environment, going deeper into the matter will show us that the move may have serious negative implications and the move may have come more as a response to sustained pressure and lobbying from the paper and pulp industry rather than a genuine concern for the environment or the forest dwelling communities.

Let us first look at the positives that are being touted by the supporters of this policy. It is being said that with industry taking up degraded forests, and with the subsequent investment, India’s forest cover will increase to the ideal level of 33%, the target India has set for itself, in a mere five years. Increased forest cover means reduction in carbon emissions, another environmental benefit. Apart from the environment, it will benefit the forest dwelling communities as well as it will provide employment to those people in the industries that are set up there. The industry will gain from it in the form of increased and assured supply of raw materials, which has always been a concern in the industry. There is huge demand in the market for paper products which is currently met through imports, and with literacy levels going up, the demand is going to rise even further, and this move will help in meeting such demand, at lower prices. So the picture looks rosy and win all for everyone.

First let us look at the environmental factors. When you hand over the forest resource to industry, you are leaving it to be exploited to its hilt for commercial gains and depleting the resource. What is the kind of forest that will grow on these lands once given to industry? Eucalyptus is the major tree that will be grown. It is a proven fact that that the commercial trees like eucalyptus, which are very fast growing, deplete the water table considerably. It also does not allow other species to grow in the same area. The industry will promote mono cropping which in itself entails a lot of risks. Such trees also do not provide ideal habitat to most forms of animals. And the most basic thing that a forest should do, prevent soil erosion, is also not done by these forests. Again, one of the many benefits being claimed by the supporters of this move is that these forests will act as carbon sinks. This is also not true as carbon can be absorbed significantly only by forests having a very thick canopy cover, which is not the case with commercial plantations. Hence, if anything, there is going to be more of an environmental hazard than benefit if forest land is leased to industry.

Coming on to the other factor of this move benefiting the forest dwelling communities, it is not very difficult to see that even these people will be exploited and left stranded. While it is true that some of them will get employment in these industries in the form of tending to the forests and other forestry operations, it is also true that they will lose more than what they will gain. First is the risk of displacement from their traditional and age old abodes. We have seen this happening again and again, and the bloody uprisings in Nandigram in West Bengal are testimony to this. We do not want another one, do we? Again, the industry will be buying off traditional rights of fodder and other forest produce from the people. This will mean loss of the communities’ traditional rights over fodder and other forest produce over which they have been dependent for ages. The industries will be far less tolerant of these people taking away forest produce once they have bought the rights compared to the forest department. True, that the people themselves will sell off these rights, but have we not seen how these rights are acquired, are the people aware and capable of negotiating the right prices with the smart business savvy industrialists, and are they far sighted enough to see what alternative sources they have once they give away their rights to the industry? These are some very pertinent questions that need to be asked of ourselves before any such move.

I fail to understand, yet again, as to why does the government need to give away forest land, even degraded, to the industry to meet its environment targets? Can it not do it by itself? What is our Forest Department doing? Well, I guess like most other government agencies, it is.........forget it........

All in the Name of Development

Development is a tricky word. For the past few years, I have been trying to understand what it really means and who defines development, and what the measures of development are.

As a part of one of my projects, I went to a village in Northern India. It was a chance visit, and it was a hilly village and had a very difficult access route, with no roads and on a hill. I had my own agenda of trying to see the potential of microcredit in the state, and though this village was not on my planned schedule, I thought I might as well check out the potential of this village now that I was already there.

It was a small village of about 100 households. It was not yet connected to electricity; there was no road that connected the village to the outside world, no school (the children went to school in another village about 15 kilometers away). In short, the village was still untouched of development. Yet, they seemed a happy lot. They produced most of what they needed in the village itself, and shared it amongst themselves. I cannot call it a barter economy, as it was more of people sharing things rather than exchanging them. For example, a family which had a cow would consume milk, and whatever was leftover, it would give it away to anyone who needed it, not necessarily exchange it for something. If this family needed vegetables, they could get it from someone who had cultivated vegetables and had an excess, and that person need not have been the one who the previous family had shared its milk with. There were people who worked in the cities and some also in the Indian army, so people had the money to buy things they needed from outside the village. I hardly saw anyone using any luxury item in the village; most of the things were either the basic necessities, or those of traditional value.

I realized that the village was not developed. I knew it had immense potential as a market for microcredit and other developmental activities. I knew these people could be connected to the mainstream; they had quite a few income generation activities and could earn better money for themselves. Only if they started selling the excess produce that they had rather than just giving it away. Then it struck me. What does development actually mean? These people were happy the way they were. They were a community based on togetherness, trust, sharing and caring for each other. Were they not immensely developed already? Or bringing electricity to their lives, bringing them closer to the markets, making them earn more would mean development. What I realized was while I was uncomfortable without electricity, they were not, and they did not need it. While I felt they earned very less, it was something they had never felt, as they did not have many needs to speak of, they had enough for their bar necessities and that is what mattered to them. While I thought they could actually have a lot of fancy things if they were linked to the market, I also realized that it would create a demand and dissatisfaction when they will not be able to get those things. They were happy as they were without having too many demands. Again, development would mean them earning more by selling their produce rather than sharing it, would it not destroy the very fabric of the community based on trust and sharing. People would then be more commercialized and be unhappy, they would earn more but lose out on the brotherhood they shared.

I walked off, obviously happy to have seen such a community for myself but was also left confused as to what development actually means. Do these people need development? Or are they better left the way they are? What is more important? Being developed or being happy? Because I realized that happiness does not follow development always, neither is it imperative for development to precede happiness. So, what should be done with this village? I left it alone and did not make it a part of my report. I only hope that no one comes to this village and thrusts their brand of development on these simple people.