About IATP

The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy promotes resilient family farms, rural communities and ecosystems around the world through research and education, science and technology, and advocacy.

Founded in 1986, IATP is rooted in the family farm movement. With offices in Minneapolis and Geneva, IATP works on making domestic and global agricultural policy more sustainable for everyone.

IATP Web sites

About Think Forward

Think Forward is a blog written by staff of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy covering sustainability as it intersects with food, rural development, international trade, the environment and public health.

Categories

Archives

RSS feeds

 Subscribe in a reader

« Fast food advertising to children is relentless | Main | Learning from China's food system »

November 12, 2010

Exporting privatization

When Obama visited India earlier this week, saying India "has already emerged" as a power in Asia and globally, his compliments were loaded.

On Wednesday night at IATP, Leo Saldanha and Bhargavi Rao from the Environment Support Group (ESG) in Bangalore, described India's current tug of war between its traditional commons-based framework (collectively owned resources and landscapes) and the privatization that accompanies foreign direct investment (FDI) and globalization.

In the U.S. today, as highlighted by Shalini Gupta with IATP’s Center for Earth, Energy and Democracy, imagining a model without privatization may be near impossible for many. India's current struggle is more comparable to late-1800's North America—in the midst of the industrial revolution, at war with indigenous tribes, and spurred onward by increasing demand for natural resources and promised riches of industrial development.

The push for globalization in India brings with it a fundamental shift in the environment and traditional way of life. According to Saldanha, jobs are indeed created, but not jobs for the farmers, fishers and indigenous tribes. In fact, the land, waters and forests that provide their livelihoods are being appropriated to private interests and natural resources are being extracted at alarming rates.

Global demand—and India's own push for an increased GDP—dictates that profits be maximized. The traditional commons-based framework and environmental laws, then, are barriers that must be removed. It began, Saldanha said, in the 60s tourist boom: coastal beaches once used for fishing filled up with four-star hotels.

Now, according to Bhargavi Rao, roads are being widened, public parks are being gated and grazing lands are being turned into garbage dumps for corporations. And to make room for these drastic changes to the environment, development advocates are pushing to dilute India’s environmental laws.

In 1986, two years after the tragic Bhopal gas leak, the Indian parliament enacted the Environment Protection Act. It allows companies and individuals to be held criminally (not just civilly) liable for violations of environmental standards. Now, an RFP from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is pushing for a move from the current standards to one limited to civil liability in the Indian Ministry of Environment and Forests—a move that would essentially pull the legislation's teeth while protecting foreign investors.

Saldanha and Bhargavi described the underreported thousands of Indian farmer suicides throughout the past decade attributed to this globalization. "The state moved from being a custodian of public land to an appropriating force," Saldanha said. 

What are Leo, Bhargavi and ESG doing to fight back? A combination of protest with litigation and lobbying forms the foundation of ESGs work, but as Bhargavi said, "Protest is backbone of grassroots struggle." One example included forming a human chain around a lake that was nearly sold off to business interests. Another, coalition-based, action included writing a death certificate for the Ministry of Environment and Forests.

The latest effort centers on trying to stop Asia's largest steel maker, POSCO, from being allowed to build plants on forest and coastal lands. Clearance for this project—funded, in part by Warren Buffett, and India's largest-ever foreign direct investment—has been granted but, as one NGO alleges, may have been obtained illegally. For now, the project's progress has been stalled, but not defeated.

Obama's visit earlier this week was more than a goodwill visit, multinational business interests globally and in the U.S. stand to make millions. "Maximizing profits for a few while leaving millions behind," is how Saldanha describes the ongoing changes. And, perhaps Obama's description of India as "already emerged" was a bit premature. If emerging means destroying the environment, displacing the indigenous and taking livelihoods away from poor farmers, surely prosperity lies on another path.

Andrew Ranallo

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341e565253ef013488eb54e0970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Exporting privatization:

Comments

David

Great post. India is definitely missing the point. Taking livelihoods away from poor farmers forces them to struggle and protest. The farmers in majority struggle for higher compensation rates specially when land is acquired in the vicinity of large cities for residential purposes. The majority of the farmers, who have assembled in Delhi in August this year, were agitated on the issue of low compensation rate and their main demand was higher compensation equal to NOIDA (a NCR region).In fact it is the fixed pattern after the ammendment in land acquisition act 1984, at least in the fertile tract of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, the sequence of event more or less similar , Government announced the compensation rate after the legal notice of acquisition, these rate initially kept much below the market price of the land, farmers start agitation for the increase ,the peaceful agitation after sometime turn violent, police use force, which results in the killing of some farmers and policemen and then Government increased the compensation rates,political parties intrude for political gains.

It happened at several places like Ghodi Bacheda in NOIDA,Bajna in Mathura and recently in Tappal.
The problem is not only the archaic law of 1894 but the intentions of the Government which count more than the law.As in present case the objective is to handover the agriculture land to construction companies for residential project and not for the common public utility.

The issues in tribal areas of Chhatisgarh, Orissa and Jharkhand are different. In these regions the protection of habitat and resources which sustain their life and ecological balance and rehabilitation are the major issues and not the compensation.India is rich in mineral wealth but the development is not merely the mining but it include the human development also.Development has its route and time frame and any acceleration may result into devastation. Indian political system specially its democratic set up has proved it again and again that it can strike a fine balance between the human and capital development. But as an "emerging" country , it really faces serious challenges.

David

Christopher Hinn

Bringing in big businesses in a country has its disadvantage because there are livelihood of some people that are greatly affected by it. Resorts that are put up beside the beaches would mean losing part of their livelihood which is fishing. Profits may be gain out from it but these are just enjoyed by a few.

The comments to this entry are closed.