Development Vs Environment: A discussion with Prof Amitabh Kundu. #worldenvironmentday June 2 2017

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Hello. Welcome everybody. Today is World Environment Day, 5th June 2017. And we need to discuss something I think the country is deeply troubled by. It is where the development and environment can go together hand in hand. The sustainable development goals enables us to understand that it can. But what is really happening at the ground? Are we together? Are we working with environment and development? Or is there some kind of a dichotomy between the understanding of these two different things? Is there a divergence in the understanding in these two different concepts? Today we are very fortunate to have with us a very, very eminent developmental economist. Dr. Amitav Kundu, a professor, a very renowned professor, from the Center of Study of Regional Development, CSRD, JNU. Sir, thank you for being with us today. Thank you. Sir, what do you feel? Do you feel that there is a tension between development and environment? Is there some kind of a problem area? Is development and environment not related? Or what do you feel, sir? [00:01:20] Dr. Amitav Kundu: You know, posing the issue as development versus environment, to my mind is errorless. But similarly, to say that there is no tension between environment and development is also extremely misleading. To think that the best possible strategy for sustainable development would automatically ensure the highest rate of economic growth is, I think, certain to occur. When you are taking the issues of sustainability, looking at climate change parameters, looking at environmental degradation, looking at long-term objectives of growth, objectives of growth, you cannot automatically assume that the strategy would remain only on maximizing the growth rate. There will be changes in the product mix, there will be changes in the technology. And certainly to say that there will be no impact on the growth strategy or the overall rate of economic growth, it's certainly not correct. And one should admit it. You know, what happens? There is a denial that no, there is no tension, you can have growth as well as you can have sustainability. Thereby, you are really leaving some of the critical research questions uninvestigated. It is much better to say yes, there can be some trade-off, some, you know, overall impact on the growth rate coming down marginally. But I am absolutely convinced on the basis of the empirical studies available that if you include sustainability in your growth strategy, the impact should not be very significant. But to say that there will be no impact is really leaving the issue vague and the vested interest can always come in. I think it is therefore better to say yes, we would like to have sustainability, these are the parameters we will include and this will be the impact. These are the sections who would be adversely affected, these are the sections who will benefit and those who are adversely affected will be compensated in this manner. [00:03:31] Speaker 1: Right, sir. But, I mean, I think we do have certain sustainable development goals that the country has decided for itself. But, you know, I have a few examples here which probably we can talk about, which, you know, which would probably help us understand the situation where we should go or we should achieve these things, but we are not. For example, there is one paper by Herbert Giraldet, he is a member of the Club of Rome and he talks about regenerative cities, about the need to re-enrich the landscape and, you know, include measures to increase capacity of absorption of carbon. of carbon emissions, say rooftop gardening, say, you know, methods where we can actually think as a whole city, as an organic city, where we can regenerate the city in terms of every parameter, whether it's environment, whether it's even, for example, we were talking a little while ago about the fact that we do not have better intelligence in terms of traffic control. Say in the cities where, say in the cities where, if we have better traffic control, we could probably augment, peak our loads, we could augment the traffic offences and all of these we could probably deal with better parking spaces. But we are not, we don't see our cities, even the best of cities in the country, moving towards this kind of sustainable model. So, what would you say about, what is your... [00:04:59] Dr. Amitav Kundu: You see, I would entirely agree with the proposition that you are coming with on the basis of some review of the current literature, that environmental science has not come to a stage which can... You see, I think, you know, we are going to be able to do a stage where you are coming with the current literature, that you are coming with the current literature, that you are coming with the current literature. You see, I think, you know, in a certain manner, that there is a clear specification of the trade-off, which has not yet been done. Efforts are being made. Now, when a discipline is still evolving, isn't in its adolescence, I can well understand that the vested interest will try to creep in, because the science has not come to the stage of being called a physics or chemistry. So, there are certain, you know, parameters which have some flexibility, which can be manipulated. So, I would therefore think that one would have to look at these parameters, trying to quantify as much as possible. But one should also have a fuzzy logic system, give range of value which is possible, do some kind of a sensitivity analysis and give more than one option. So, that it can be taken to the ground and the validity can be tested. [00:06:24] Speaker 1: Very interesting. So, you think that there should be another kind of study, which we are not doing at present. [00:06:29] Dr. Amitav Kundu: Absolutely. Absolutely. I think there has to be much more rigor, much more science, but at the same time, the study need not necessarily be deterministic, coming out with one specific solution. There has to be alternate scenarios, which can be brought in on the basis of the probability of certain values actually realizing in reality. [00:06:47] Speaker 1: So, what do you think of environmental impact assessments? What, where do you think that features in, when we are next, for example, we are talking about sustainable industries, for example. So, what do you think environmental impact assessments are, do you think they are happening in the way they should happen or, you know, part of the sustainable development discourse that we are having, where do you think EIA actually falls? [00:07:12] Dr. Amitav Kundu: So, I think since you have raised a very specific issue, let me give a very concrete answer, you know, in the context of the Indian situation. You know, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, they have come out with their 2009 declaration and also, this has been modified recently. Now, it is the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, which has to really take on this environmental assessment, through the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, which has been created. Now, the Quality Control Council of India has clearly stated that these agencies which are doing the evaluation and impact assessment are often doing somewhat less than, you know, satisfactory job. Many times, in fact, Athletic Council has mentioned that there is number of cases where they have been cutting and pasting and many of the parameters have not been really established on the basis of rigorous data and that's why they have also suggested there should be accreditation of these agencies which are doing the EIA. Basically, they are saying that the State of Science and Arts in Environmental Impact Assessment has a long way to go and we have to improve that. And I personally believe that when the science is at that stage, the political interventions become extremely critical and could be dangerous. So, in order to safeguard that, I think there has to be a proper institutionalization of the decision making, so that the scientific studies can be brought in, but at the same time there can be an evaluation of the reports, environmental impact report, which can be made by group. So, if you institutionalize by bringing in well-recognized scholars who have also credibility in the public domain, and if they evaluate, I think it would be perhaps a move in the right direction. [00:09:20] Speaker 1: Okay, so you are talking about establishing a system of evaluation of EIA experts. Absolutely, absolutely. Which is not there at present, and you feel that EIAs are there to stay. I mean, you feel that EIAs would have an impact if we do better, because EIAs also somehow restrict in certain ways. You know, people don't want to do EIAs for a reason. So, I mean, don't you think that it would be at cross purposes? [00:09:48] Dr. Amitav Kundu: No, no, I'll tell you, you know what's happened under the Quality Council of India, there is an agency, National Registration Board for Personnel and Training. Now, they are trying to work out a national accreditation structure with the help of ASOCHAM, FIKI, CII. Basically, they want to bring in the practical considerations of efficiency of functioning of the company, but at the same time building the sustainability considerations. So, this national accreditation structure would be able to lay down the parameters on the basis of which you will select the companies which will do this EIA. So, I have a feeling there is a scope for bringing in objectivity. If you select these, you know, the agencies which are doing this appraisal, if you select them on the basis of some given well established structure. [00:10:46] Speaker 1: Okay, now, we understand that when we talk about SEZs and we see that, you know, certain areas in our country are delimited as SEZ areas. So, if we compare it with say hydroelectric power projects and we see that hydroelectric power projects are as development nodes and everything from roads to the dam to everything is developed. Everything is developed from hospitals to schools, everything is developed in these sites. SEZs, on the other hand, are taking areas which need, they have a certain development background or backdrop already upon which an SEZ is established. Now, is it viable for a country like ours to develop an SEZ in a completely barren area, say, landlands, and, you know, try and drive development from there? Why is it that we are taking better areas or better connected areas or at least some, in some parameters, development parameters, these areas are definitely higher? So, why are we selecting such areas and not areas which can be completely developed from zero? As a development economist, what do you think? Do you think it's a fair model? [00:12:07] Dr. Amitav Kundu: No, I think you are right that this is a key concern in many of the SEZs that they are located at a place which have an high alternate use value. And once you use it for ACZ, the alternative use in terms of multiple propping or, you know, other advantages. You know, it would not be correct to say that hydroelectric power projects do not have any location requirement. They cannot be located at every place but they have a greater flexibility. Yes. But you know, I have not understood that for agriculture, you need certain quality of land. For agricultural production or any other, you know, agro processing, you need certain locational factors. You can't expect that ACZ, ACZ doesn't need any locational factor, it can go to the top of the hill. There are certain requirements for ACZ as well. No, you know, you can't imagine that once an ACZ becomes successful, provided there is a proper built-in compensation system built into the model, wherein those who are losing land are adequately compensated. So, in that case, even if it is 3 crops, ACZ's productivity will be 10 times more than that. For example, you know, in Vasanth Kunj area, there are multiple structures coming up. I was told that it was very fertile for wheat production. Now, whatever would be the production of wheat, there would be 200 times more value coming, provided there is a proper compensation mechanism. Right. The problem is that development may lower down the growth by a small percentage, but the major issue in environmental development is that we have not developed a proper compensation mechanism. Those who tend to lose do not get adequately compensated. And those who benefit, they benefit immensely. And that is the inequality. It is not the logic of development, growth rate coming down, but the logic of ethics and equity. Equity is not being maintained in the development environment. [00:14:12] Speaker 1: Right. Yeah. That brings us to the next bit of the question where we talk about poverty. So, you have been working on poverty for so many years and you began your work with poverty. But do you think that environment and poverty have any relationship? Do you think that, like you said, compensation not being structured, not having a sort of mechanism, do you think that has any development and poverty and poverty are interlinked? Definitely. Do you think that environment as well is interlinked? [00:14:42] Dr. Amitav Kundu: You know, besides economic development, like you, I have also been looking at the spatial phenomena and if you correlate the index of poverty and deprivation with the index of, you know, quality of environment, you certainly find that there is a negative relationship. You do find that the areas which have high degree of poverty, I am talking about India, take the district level data, you find out the pockets of poverty, you really do not have that much of environmental problem. Because you have high poverty in remote areas where air quality is good, water quality is good. You have problems of environment in the areas where over exploitation of resources is taking place. sources is taking place. Firavpur, Farid code where the water contamination in Punjab is very high but you know overall development is very high because you have over exploited. Similarly in Gujarat the cement factories wherever they are located poverty is low and the cement industry is creating enormous problems there. So my submission is that we have taken the overuse of resources but we do not compensate the people the way we should and those who are suffering their sufferings would have been mitigated by taking protective measures. That's what we have not done. We look at a cement factory we do not take the precautionary measures to see that the environmental pollution is not taken. Similarly in Punjab agricultural productivity has gone up especially in those pockets where seed fertilizer technology came in it has polluted the groundwork water with uranium, with aluminium in all kinds of ways but environmental problems are serious. Poverty is not there. You know because you have shifted the poverty to other regions. The upper stream and lower stream benefits. Again that's a very important thing. The benefits are coming downstream and upper stream people do not be compensated. It's basically the equity concern in the environment development debate which needs to be addressed with seriousness within a proper institution [00:16:59] Speaker 1: institutional structure. Poverty is a institutional structure with rigorous back up by rigorous empirical research. Poverty is one or two examples I just want to ask back up of those two examples. One there is this NH-112 which is in West Bengal and they have done something called a mini-chipo movement. It's been in the news April 2017. It's been in the news. This is from from Barashat to Petroport in the Indo-Bangalese border. This road is lined with 100 year old trees and it's an ecosystem which is like it's a beautiful road. It has no doubt about it. But what they have done is they want road winding and they want to do away with these very old trees. So if we were to develop this area is there no I mean I'm going to say that is there no alternative to this kind of development. Do we really need to get rid of these very beautiful old trees because they are not likely to get rid of these very beautiful old trees because they are not likely to another 100 years we really don't know what's going to happen to the landscape of this country. So is the conservation also part of our mandate? So I mean we are unique because of that. India is unique because of its conservation mandate. India is unique because of its conservation. So you think that you know there is a lot of lip service to environment where maybe certain innovative alternatives could also be sought and those could become examples and beacons of hope for this country where you feel that they are not really the countries are fulfilling a certain SDG target. So they are fulfilling a certain norm because we have to have an EIA norm. So we are fulfilling a norm. But rather we feel from within and we want to do it with our heart. So isn't there I can tell some examples because this is an example I have. If you have any example where Indianness is Indian solutions to problems that are happening? [00:18:57] Dr. Amitav Kundu: Now I think it is extremely difficult for me to comment on a very specific micro level project but you know through this example you are raising an important issue. You are saying that there can't be a you know generalized kind of a solution which will fit all situations. You are saying every specific situation needs to be examined in the context of the available alternatives and that I think is extremely important. Now the point is whenever in a micro level situation the data gaps are there some of the policy perspectives are uncertain there is a strong possibility of vested interest coming in. And when any scientific investigation has not acquired definite robustness the possibilities of political intervention also becomes very high. I would like to mention in the context of urban development projects there is evaluation being done. For specific projects by Chrysalis care you know they do credit rating and then they give some kind of rating A++ or A- you know to give an impression that is very very scientific thing. But it is very well known that many of the parameters which they are using are not very you know definitely identified. Now the problem is you know I have done some evaluation. You know there is a pseudo scientific projection being made because for credit rating the rating is extremely important. I am mentioning you know if these credit rating agencies tell the urban development authorities or the special purple vehicle which is being constituted at the city level. If they tell that we are going to evaluate these projects in terms of these 20 criteria, these project authorities will manipulate the data. You know, because the data system is still in a state of luck. So these credit rating agencies will not even mention that these are exactly in the numerator and denominator of the indicators. So that the possibility of manipulation by the reporting agency is minimum. Now the point is they do not mention but how exactly they convert all the data into one number B plus or A minus is also not known. So what often is the criticism against these credit rating agencies that they promote some kind of a macro perspective on development, superimpose it in a developing country without even the country knowing about it. The way they do the credit rating is not 100% transparent. In fact, many of the parameters they leave blank and that's why there is a great possibility that these credit rating agencies are pushing development perspective without clearly stating the policy makers that these are the macroeconomic changes that we are bringing in. That's a major criticism. So I have a feeling that even in the context of environmental evaluation, this is much more serious. There are large number of agencies with an interest in developing countries. And these agencies can bring in their judgment, their vested interest implicitly through the methodology which may not be stated in a very very explicit and transparent manner. So that's a risk that we have to protect ourselves against. [00:22:24] Speaker 1: That's a big risk. And I think we are under it now 24/7. The last we just bring this to a kind of an end. We know that there are certain methods of say bio waste systems where we have a lot of waste in dump sites and managing waste in the country. And then remediation of sites, mining sites. Now these are methods which we have heard of. We have read so many papers. We are doing research in geography and do. And so many people have read. We have written about these kind of methods and policies that can be in place to help us live in a better environment. That is not part of the development discourse as such. That is not part of the agenda as such. So I want to ask you that do you think the present government is actually serious about environmental concerns or do you think that we are in a situation where we still feel that it is a threat to development and not really a required parameter. Has it not? Are we really serious? [00:23:34] Dr. Amitav Kundu: No, I think you are raising an issue that while at the central government level, state government level, the institutional structure that has been created should look at the issues, the larger macro issues with a lot more rigor and a lot more robust data. There are a lot of good work being done. There are a lot of good work being done by civil society organizations at different places. The present existing institutional structure within the government does not take advantage of those research which are available. And I think that is an important lacuna. I would personally believe that there is a scope for not only strengthening the research which is being done at the state level institutions and the central level institutions, but also to bring in the ground level institutions. But also to bring in the ground level research which is being done by a large number of organizations to bring it within the macro framework to have some kind of a feedback between macro and micro level research findings and that is how we can perhaps move to a holistic solution and as you rightly mentioned earlier that each specific local situation needs to be addressed in the context of the local emerging reality and that certainly should be one of the key factors. [00:24:51] Speaker 1: So as regional advisor on poverty in your new UN you are part of the UN group right now. So what is it that you are understanding the regional poverty scenario as such? Any insights, any small insights for our viewers there? We will come back on poverty maybe another time when service in India but right now if you could just get a small insight about what you feel is the current scenario as far as poverty. [00:25:21] Dr. Amitav Kundu: Now in fact I am advising on the West Asian poverty situation and basically I can just give you generally one statement because the report is yet to be published. The understanding that West Asia doesn't have much of poverty as put forward by the global reports coming from the UN and other organizations. And we are saying that we are saying that we are saying that we are saying that we are saying that the reason for the multidimensional poverty partly can be linked to the environmental parameters. And that situation certainly is not making us complacent because things in many of the countries in that part of the world have serious issues of multidimensional poverty including health, nutrition and also educational parameters. So that is not making us a lot of people in the world have serious issues of the world have serious issues of the world.