Ameer Shahul
Head of the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) Madhav Gadgil dropped a bombshell yesterday in an opinion piece in The Indian Express newspaper. Drawing a powerful connection between the ethic of meekness in Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy and the current plight of India’s marginalised communities, Gadgil emphasised that while Gandhi’s interpretation of Matthew 5:5—“Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth”— inspired a vision of non-violent resistance and moral strength, today’s India sees the meek suffering under the weight of environmental exploitation.
Gadgil highlighted how environmental degradation, particularly in regions like the Western Ghats, is largely driven by the interests of a powerful elite, backed by bureaucrats and politicians. He used the tragic example of the Meppadi landslide, which claimed numerous lives, to illustrate the human cost of unchecked environmental exploitation. This event, according to Gadgil, has begun to awaken the conscience of the nation, suggesting that the meek may no longer remain passive.
The increase in landslides, linked to human activities like quarrying and construction in ecologically sensitive regions, reflects a broader disregard for environmental concerns. Gadgil’s Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) had recommended restrictions on such activities, but the government’s initial suppression of the report and subsequent disinformation campaigns revealed the systemic resistance to environmentally conscious policies.
In a frank and candid opinion now, Gadgil shed light on the need for empowerment of common people, especially through technological advances like smartphones, which have connected previously isolated communities. This empowerment, he argues, can help the “meek” claim their rightful share of resources and protection from environmental and social injustices.
To foster this empowerment, Gadgil proposed FOUR practical steps for communities in affected regions like Wayanad:
1. Transfer of quarry management to local women’s groups like Kudumbashree, leveraging the successful model in Gadchiroli.
2. Restricting tourism development to tribal-managed home-stays, thus preserving the environment and ensuring local benefits.
3. Handing over tea estate management to labor cooperatives, improving conditions for workers.
4. Legally challenging the Wildlife Protection Act to allow self-defence against dangerous wildlife, aligning with the rights granted under the Indian Penal Code.
By advocating for localised control and legal reforms, Gadgil envisions a future where India’s “meek” can assert their rights and inherit a more just and sustainable earth. Gadgil’s four suggestions offer a blueprint for empowering local communities and promoting sustainable development, particularly in ecologically sensitive regions like the Western Ghats. Let us examine each of the revolutionary proposal in detail:
1. Transfer of Quarry Management to Local Women’s Self-Help Groups
Kudumbashree, the poverty eradication and women empowerment program in Kerala, has a strong track record of organising women into self-help groups, which are capable of managing resources and generating income. Women’s groups, particularly those with a vested interest in the well-being of their communities, are more likely to manage quarries sustainably. They would prioritise environmental conservation over short-term profits, reducing harmful practices like excessive blasting and unregulated extraction.
By taking control of quarries, local women could create employment opportunities within their communities, ensuring that profits remain within the region rather than being siphoned off by external operators. This would foster economic resilience and reduce dependence on exploitative labor practices. Empowering women in traditionally male-dominated industries like quarrying could lead to broader social changes, challenging gender norms and improving the status of women in rural areas. This could inspire similar initiatives across other sectors, driving a larger movement for gender equality and community-led development.
2. Restricting Tourism Development to Tribal-Managed Home-stays
Tribal-managed home-stays would help preserve the unique cultural heritage of indigenous communities while minimising the environmental impact of tourism. Unlike large resorts, home-stays typically have a smaller ecological footprint, use local materials, and follow traditional practices that are harmonious with nature. This model would provide a steady source of income for tribal communities without disrupting their way of life. By keeping tourism revenues within the community, it would reduce the economic disparity often seen in regions where external investors control tourism infrastructure.
Home-stays can promote a more authentic and responsible form of tourism, where visitors engage directly with local cultures and are educated about the importance of environmental conservation. This can lead to a shift in tourist behaviour, encouraging more sustainable travel practices.
3. Handing Over Tea Estate Management to Labor Cooperatives
Placing management of tea estates in the hands of labourers themselves would directly address the often exploitative conditions in which tea workers operate. Cooperative management could ensure fair wages, better working conditions, and secure housing, leading to improved quality of life for workers. Labor cooperatives would give workers a direct stake in the success of the tea estates, fostering a sense of ownership and responsibility. This could lead to more sustainable agricultural practices, as workers would be motivated to preserve the land for future generations.
This model challenges the traditional plantation system, where profits are concentrated in the hands of a few owners. By distributing profits more equitably among the workers, cooperatives can reduce economic inequality and empower marginalised communities.
4. Legally Challenging the Wildlife Protection Act (WLPA)
This proposal addresses the conflict between wildlife conservation and human safety, particularly in areas where wild animals, such as elephants and wild pigs, pose a significant threat to human life and property. Allowing communities to defend themselves could prevent tragic incidents and reduce the tension between conservation goals and human needs.
By amending the WLPA, the government could promote a more balanced approach to wildlife conservation that respects the rights and safety of local communities. This could lead to more cooperative relationships between conservationists and local populations, as communities would no longer feel that their concerns are being ignored.
Empowering communities to protect themselves could encourage more active involvement in conservation efforts. If local people feel their rights are respected, they are more likely to participate in and support conservation initiatives, leading to more sustainable outcomes.
Gadgil’s these four proposals collectively challenge the status quo by advocating for localised control, community empowerment, and a more just distribution of resources. Implementing these ideas could revolutionise how environmental and social policies are formulated and executed in India. By shifting control from centralised authorities and corporate interests to local communities, these proposals promote a more democratic and participatory approach to governance.
More importantly, Gadgil’s suggestions focusses on the inseparable link between environmental sustainability and social justice. By addressing both simultaneously, these proposals could pave the way for policies that are not only ecologically sound but also equitable.
This could, in fact, create a ripple effect, leading to widespread adoption of community-driven, sustainable development practices. Such a shift has the potential to redefine the relationship between people, the environment, and the economy.
( Ameer Shahul is an environmentalist and public policy analyst based in Bengaluru )
