The workshop looks at the Seed Act and seed certification in particular for organic farmers and communities.
Workshop Organizers: GREEN Foundation and Organic Farmers Association of India.
Venue: Fireflies Ashram, Pipal Trees, Dinnepalaya, Kaggalipura, Kanakpura Road, Bangalore.
Here's the Program Schedule
30th August, 2007
Welcome Address : 10.30 - 10.45
Self Introduction: 10.45 - 11.00
Role of seed savers in today's context - Claude Alvares - 11.15 - 12.00
Implications of seed bill on seed saving - Dr. Vanaja Ramprasad - 12.00 - 12.30
Seed diversity cataloguing- Initial effort - 12.30 - 1.30, 2.00- 3.00
Presentation by invited representatives on seed saving - 3.15 - 4.30
Discussion on the seed bill - 4.30 - 6.00
31st August, 2007
Discussion on seed cert standards and seed act 1966 - 9.00 - 11.00
Varietal registration procedures - 11.15 - 12.00
Discussion on evolving organic seed production standards - 12.00-1.30, 2.15-3.00
Seed exchange action plan - 3.15-4.30
Concluding remarks - 4.35 -4.50
Vote of thanks - 4.50-5.00
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Monday, August 27, 2007
Prof Ruth DeFries's presentation
Prof Ruth DeFries was here last month at ATREE and gave a very interesting talk.
We've posted below the synopsis and some of the interesting slides that she has generously agreed to share on this blog for those of us who missed attending her talk.
This presentation examines the process of land use change through wildlands, frontier clearings, subsistence agriculture, to intensive agriculture and urban settlements. This process parallels other societal transitions that occur with development, including demographic, health, nutrition, and energy transitions. The research discussed in the presentation focuses on the southern Amazon, where large-scale deforestation is occurring for pasture and mechanized cropland as part of the frontier stage of land use transitions. Remote sensing is an essential tool to identify deforestation and quantify the fate of deforested lands. India is currently experiencing relatively stable forest cover and rapid urbanization. One of the major transitions underway is the increased use of modern fuels and declining use of traditional biofuels.
------------------------------------
If you would like to correspond with Prof Ruth DeFries, you can email her at rdefries@umd.edu
or write to her at: The Dept of Geography and Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center
2181 Lefrak HallCollege Park, MD 20742
Tel: 301 405 4884 Fax: 301 314 9299
We've posted below the synopsis and some of the interesting slides that she has generously agreed to share on this blog for those of us who missed attending her talk.
This presentation examines the process of land use change through wildlands, frontier clearings, subsistence agriculture, to intensive agriculture and urban settlements. This process parallels other societal transitions that occur with development, including demographic, health, nutrition, and energy transitions. The research discussed in the presentation focuses on the southern Amazon, where large-scale deforestation is occurring for pasture and mechanized cropland as part of the frontier stage of land use transitions. Remote sensing is an essential tool to identify deforestation and quantify the fate of deforested lands. India is currently experiencing relatively stable forest cover and rapid urbanization. One of the major transitions underway is the increased use of modern fuels and declining use of traditional biofuels.
------------------------------------
If you would like to correspond with Prof Ruth DeFries, you can email her at rdefries@umd.edu
or write to her at: The Dept of Geography and Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center
2181 Lefrak HallCollege Park, MD 20742
Tel: 301 405 4884 Fax: 301 314 9299
Launch of Prof K.N. Ganeshaiah's Kannada Novel on Sept 2nd
Here's the invitation
Contributed by G. Ravikanth, Post Doctoral Fellow, ATREE.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
PROF.V.K.R.V.RAO CENTENARY YEAR (2007-2008) -2nd Public Lecture
Date: Friday the 31st of August, 2007 at 5.30 PM
Venue: Jnanajyothi Seminar Hall, Central College Campus, Bangalore-560 001
Programme Schedule
Welcome and Introductory Remarks
By
Professor N.Jayaram, The Director, Institute for Social and Economic Change
Public Lecture
By
Professor P. K. Michael Tharakan
Presidential Remarks
By
Sri Cyriac Joseph
Honourable Chief Justice, High Court of Karnataka
Vote of Thanks
By
Professor D. Rajasekhar,
Centre for Decentralisation and Development, ISEC
Here's the abstract of Professor P. K. Michael Tharakan's talk.
Prof Tharakan holds the Sri Ramakrishna Hegde Chair in Decentralisation and Governance at the Institute for Social and Economic Change
Present discourse on decentralization in India : Conceptual origins
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in his Address to the Chief Ministers’ Conference on Panchayati Raj on 29 June, 2007 is reported to have said that the transfer of responsibilities should be on the basis of subsidiarity theory. It can be taken as a reason good enough to conclude that the current official efforts at administrative decentralization are to be governed by the principle of subsidiarity. But the origins of the concept of subsidiarity itself is complex. Perhaps the first time that the people of India encountered subsidiarity in any form might have been when the early British colonialists engaged Indian Princes in Subsidiary Alliances. In a way it also was a form of decentralization. Those Princes who signed the Treaty were promised the support of the British Indian Army and the Colonial Government to rule as they pleased within their own realms. They in turn had to pay a regular tribute and follow the British in major areas of decision making; especially foreign affairs.
In late 19th century, particularly under Lord Rippon’s Viceroyalty, a more clear cut policy of decentralization and local government was introduced. It was meant to `educate’ Indians in self-governance by involving some of them at least in the actual act of governance. Though under the later Dyarchy the department of local self government was allotted to the Provincial Governments and that too under the control of elected Ministers, at least a section of the nationalist opinion seems to have been opposed to it. They believed that the local government policy on the basis of subsidiarity was meant to contain the emergence of widespread nationalist feelings among the Indians. In this context two streams of thought that emerged in India and in Europe deserves special attention. Mahatma Gandhi developed his powerful concept of `Village Swaraj’ and converted it into an important slogan of the National Movement. He read the history of pre-colonial Indian villages on the basis of the continuity of `panchayats’ under which the rural people lived relatively unhindered by external authorities. On that basis he developed his `communitarian’ ideas of governance, which covered even a world government based upon consensus rather than contestation. One can see, without detracting from the greatness of his idea, a subtle political genius at work. This slogan resulted in mobilization of vast majority of the rural masses of India behind the Movement against the then central government, which was British. In 1931, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Prics XI, through his Encyclical `Quadragesimo anno’ enunciated a similar theory by `reinventing’ the subsidiarity principle. His suggestion towards reorganising the social order was on the basis of “not taking any decisions which can be taken at the lowest level, any further.” This enunciation of the theory was carried forward by political scientists of different colours until it got reaffirmation under the influence of Christian Democratic Parties in various European countries. The principle got entrenched in the Maatricht Treaty, one of the fundamental documents of the European Union.
Meanwhile, independent India at its Constituent Assembly widely debated the Gandhian principle of Village Swaraj. The colonial concept of subsidiarity which argued for power devolved from above was already under a cloud and it was effectively contained within British Indian territories alone. Except for Mysore and to some extent Baroda, no other Indian princely states seem to have implemented it seriously. On the other hand the Papal Principle of power being built up from below seem not to have had any impact upon Indian decision making around 1950. Therefore the debate was mainly around the Communitarian concept of Village Swaraj which had to accept a serious set-back when it was counter attacked by a group of brilliant theorists led by no less a person than Dr Ambedkar. It is possible that Dr Ambedkar and company had a better reading of pre-colonial village history and the contemporary rural situation in India. The Village Swaraj concept had to take a lower seat in the Directive Principles of the Constitution. Thus a powerful slogan which aroused millions of rural people in their fight against the British was found inappropriate to be placed in the mainstream of constitutional provisions when independent India set upon creating a government for itself.
Within post-independent India, it is seen that the idea of decentralized local self-government reappearing with a vengeance. Originally it appeared under the Community Development and National Extension Service Programme. The idea was `borrowed’ from an entirely different source; that of Anglo-Saxon social science and town planning. Though serious attempts were made to adapt them on to the Indian village scene, it did not seem to have made any great impact, as Balwantrai Mehta Committee which was appointed to look into its working, reported. Mehta Committee suggested rejuvenation of the programme by linking it up with elected representatives and their decision making bodies. In the 1970s when the short-lived Janata Government came into power, they effectively reasserted their right to inherit the Gandhian legacy by attempting further to strengthen the Panchayat Raj System.
As a result the structure of Panchayat Raj with limited amount of transfer of power existed in India. On the other hand, as part of the so called “third wave of democratisation” there was a turn of focus towards decentralisation, internationally. With the breakdown of Soviet Union and Communist Regimes in Eastern Europe, international funding as well as developmental agencies, backed by academic thought all over Europe and America, found new virtues in decentralization. Along with the Constituent Principles of the European Union, there were economic theories supporting open markets pointing out the inefficiencies and non-transparencies built into socialism and centralized planning. The concept of “rolling back the State” was accepted not only by the neo-conservative opinion but also by a wide spectrum of people all over. This concept went hand-in-hand with the Papal theory reasserted by European Union, of the Central Government playing only a subsidiary role, and together had a decisive role in international decision making. Once India was caught up in the reformist stream, it also could not, it seems, get out of this persuasive argument.
India could argue that we have had a running decentralized system of Panchayati Raj going. Nevertheless, close observers could raise any number of instances with regard to widespread corruption, lack of transparency and community participation in decision making, inability of development projects to reach the grassroots since they are governed by New Delhi or State Capitals etc. The first response, was by the Rajiv Gandhi government which introduced the 64th Constitutional Amendment which faltered under parliamentary opposition. In 1993 under Narasimha Rao, a revised version of the Amendment, 73rd and 74th were presented and passed by the Parliament.
My argument is that the current wave of decentralization in India is highly influenced by the internationally conceived opinion that it is required for “good governance” which in turn is inevitable for the spread of a market economy; preferably a “human-faced version” of it. Nevertheless, the story will not be complete if I do not mention deviations from this trend. In 1983, Karnataka under the leadership of Ramakrishna Hegde and ably assisted by the Panchayati Raj Minister, Abdul Nazir Saab introduced an act towards decentralization, which not only preceded both the 64th and 73rd Amendments but also had different conceptual origins. The most prominent point of departure in the thinking behind this Act from the later Constitutional Amendments was that it stressed the transfer of authority not only from the State Government downwards, but also transfer from the Central Government itself. The conceptual origins of this line of thinking is yet to be ascertained. But my hunch is that it might have been inspired by vestiges of communitarian thinking originating from Gandhi, Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan. Decentralization attempts were made by the Left Front Government of West Bengal and the Left and Democratic Government of Kerala earlier than the Constitutional Amendments. They are also of definitely different conceptual origins. They are not so much influenced by the limited experiments that have been implemented in the wider Communist world, like those in China, Cuba and Yugoslavia, as they are by the actual demands of government and politics in these respective States. Nevertheless, the influential ideas of EMS Namboodiripad, leading Marxist ideologue, cannot be ignored in the context. His ideas seem to have stressed the strengthening of government at all levels, through decentralization. Communitarian, and decentralization theories based upon subsidiarity sometimes overlaps another important concept; that of sovereignty. This has to be checked if decentralization is not to result in economic reforms promoting an open market. The political ideology which had an important role in the formation of West Bengal and Kerala governments, had interest in that, for obvious reasons. There was, in addition, the fact that Namboodiripad was a Gandhian in early days of his political career and continued to claim that he was influenced by some aspects of Gandhian thought.
In other words, though the Prime Minister has said that decentralization in India is to be governed by the theory of subsidiarity, it may take lot of convincing in some parts of the country that he leads.
Venue: Jnanajyothi Seminar Hall, Central College Campus, Bangalore-560 001
Programme Schedule
Welcome and Introductory Remarks
By
Professor N.Jayaram, The Director, Institute for Social and Economic Change
Public Lecture
By
Professor P. K. Michael Tharakan
Presidential Remarks
By
Sri Cyriac Joseph
Honourable Chief Justice, High Court of Karnataka
Vote of Thanks
By
Professor D. Rajasekhar,
Centre for Decentralisation and Development, ISEC
Here's the abstract of Professor P. K. Michael Tharakan's talk.
Prof Tharakan holds the Sri Ramakrishna Hegde Chair in Decentralisation and Governance at the Institute for Social and Economic Change
Present discourse on decentralization in India : Conceptual origins
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in his Address to the Chief Ministers’ Conference on Panchayati Raj on 29 June, 2007 is reported to have said that the transfer of responsibilities should be on the basis of subsidiarity theory. It can be taken as a reason good enough to conclude that the current official efforts at administrative decentralization are to be governed by the principle of subsidiarity. But the origins of the concept of subsidiarity itself is complex. Perhaps the first time that the people of India encountered subsidiarity in any form might have been when the early British colonialists engaged Indian Princes in Subsidiary Alliances. In a way it also was a form of decentralization. Those Princes who signed the Treaty were promised the support of the British Indian Army and the Colonial Government to rule as they pleased within their own realms. They in turn had to pay a regular tribute and follow the British in major areas of decision making; especially foreign affairs.
In late 19th century, particularly under Lord Rippon’s Viceroyalty, a more clear cut policy of decentralization and local government was introduced. It was meant to `educate’ Indians in self-governance by involving some of them at least in the actual act of governance. Though under the later Dyarchy the department of local self government was allotted to the Provincial Governments and that too under the control of elected Ministers, at least a section of the nationalist opinion seems to have been opposed to it. They believed that the local government policy on the basis of subsidiarity was meant to contain the emergence of widespread nationalist feelings among the Indians. In this context two streams of thought that emerged in India and in Europe deserves special attention. Mahatma Gandhi developed his powerful concept of `Village Swaraj’ and converted it into an important slogan of the National Movement. He read the history of pre-colonial Indian villages on the basis of the continuity of `panchayats’ under which the rural people lived relatively unhindered by external authorities. On that basis he developed his `communitarian’ ideas of governance, which covered even a world government based upon consensus rather than contestation. One can see, without detracting from the greatness of his idea, a subtle political genius at work. This slogan resulted in mobilization of vast majority of the rural masses of India behind the Movement against the then central government, which was British. In 1931, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Prics XI, through his Encyclical `Quadragesimo anno’ enunciated a similar theory by `reinventing’ the subsidiarity principle. His suggestion towards reorganising the social order was on the basis of “not taking any decisions which can be taken at the lowest level, any further.” This enunciation of the theory was carried forward by political scientists of different colours until it got reaffirmation under the influence of Christian Democratic Parties in various European countries. The principle got entrenched in the Maatricht Treaty, one of the fundamental documents of the European Union.
Meanwhile, independent India at its Constituent Assembly widely debated the Gandhian principle of Village Swaraj. The colonial concept of subsidiarity which argued for power devolved from above was already under a cloud and it was effectively contained within British Indian territories alone. Except for Mysore and to some extent Baroda, no other Indian princely states seem to have implemented it seriously. On the other hand the Papal Principle of power being built up from below seem not to have had any impact upon Indian decision making around 1950. Therefore the debate was mainly around the Communitarian concept of Village Swaraj which had to accept a serious set-back when it was counter attacked by a group of brilliant theorists led by no less a person than Dr Ambedkar. It is possible that Dr Ambedkar and company had a better reading of pre-colonial village history and the contemporary rural situation in India. The Village Swaraj concept had to take a lower seat in the Directive Principles of the Constitution. Thus a powerful slogan which aroused millions of rural people in their fight against the British was found inappropriate to be placed in the mainstream of constitutional provisions when independent India set upon creating a government for itself.
Within post-independent India, it is seen that the idea of decentralized local self-government reappearing with a vengeance. Originally it appeared under the Community Development and National Extension Service Programme. The idea was `borrowed’ from an entirely different source; that of Anglo-Saxon social science and town planning. Though serious attempts were made to adapt them on to the Indian village scene, it did not seem to have made any great impact, as Balwantrai Mehta Committee which was appointed to look into its working, reported. Mehta Committee suggested rejuvenation of the programme by linking it up with elected representatives and their decision making bodies. In the 1970s when the short-lived Janata Government came into power, they effectively reasserted their right to inherit the Gandhian legacy by attempting further to strengthen the Panchayat Raj System.
As a result the structure of Panchayat Raj with limited amount of transfer of power existed in India. On the other hand, as part of the so called “third wave of democratisation” there was a turn of focus towards decentralisation, internationally. With the breakdown of Soviet Union and Communist Regimes in Eastern Europe, international funding as well as developmental agencies, backed by academic thought all over Europe and America, found new virtues in decentralization. Along with the Constituent Principles of the European Union, there were economic theories supporting open markets pointing out the inefficiencies and non-transparencies built into socialism and centralized planning. The concept of “rolling back the State” was accepted not only by the neo-conservative opinion but also by a wide spectrum of people all over. This concept went hand-in-hand with the Papal theory reasserted by European Union, of the Central Government playing only a subsidiary role, and together had a decisive role in international decision making. Once India was caught up in the reformist stream, it also could not, it seems, get out of this persuasive argument.
India could argue that we have had a running decentralized system of Panchayati Raj going. Nevertheless, close observers could raise any number of instances with regard to widespread corruption, lack of transparency and community participation in decision making, inability of development projects to reach the grassroots since they are governed by New Delhi or State Capitals etc. The first response, was by the Rajiv Gandhi government which introduced the 64th Constitutional Amendment which faltered under parliamentary opposition. In 1993 under Narasimha Rao, a revised version of the Amendment, 73rd and 74th were presented and passed by the Parliament.
My argument is that the current wave of decentralization in India is highly influenced by the internationally conceived opinion that it is required for “good governance” which in turn is inevitable for the spread of a market economy; preferably a “human-faced version” of it. Nevertheless, the story will not be complete if I do not mention deviations from this trend. In 1983, Karnataka under the leadership of Ramakrishna Hegde and ably assisted by the Panchayati Raj Minister, Abdul Nazir Saab introduced an act towards decentralization, which not only preceded both the 64th and 73rd Amendments but also had different conceptual origins. The most prominent point of departure in the thinking behind this Act from the later Constitutional Amendments was that it stressed the transfer of authority not only from the State Government downwards, but also transfer from the Central Government itself. The conceptual origins of this line of thinking is yet to be ascertained. But my hunch is that it might have been inspired by vestiges of communitarian thinking originating from Gandhi, Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan. Decentralization attempts were made by the Left Front Government of West Bengal and the Left and Democratic Government of Kerala earlier than the Constitutional Amendments. They are also of definitely different conceptual origins. They are not so much influenced by the limited experiments that have been implemented in the wider Communist world, like those in China, Cuba and Yugoslavia, as they are by the actual demands of government and politics in these respective States. Nevertheless, the influential ideas of EMS Namboodiripad, leading Marxist ideologue, cannot be ignored in the context. His ideas seem to have stressed the strengthening of government at all levels, through decentralization. Communitarian, and decentralization theories based upon subsidiarity sometimes overlaps another important concept; that of sovereignty. This has to be checked if decentralization is not to result in economic reforms promoting an open market. The political ideology which had an important role in the formation of West Bengal and Kerala governments, had interest in that, for obvious reasons. There was, in addition, the fact that Namboodiripad was a Gandhian in early days of his political career and continued to claim that he was influenced by some aspects of Gandhian thought.
In other words, though the Prime Minister has said that decentralization in India is to be governed by the theory of subsidiarity, it may take lot of convincing in some parts of the country that he leads.
Talk on knowledge management for NRM
Dear Friends,
You are cordially invited to attend a talk by Dr Jaishanker, Assistant Professor, Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management - Kerala.
Topic: Knowledge Management for Natural Resource Management.
Date: 6th Sep'07 (Thursday)
Time: 12.00 - 1.00 noon
Venue: ATREE terrace
Date: 6th Sep'07 (Thursday)
Time: 12.00 - 1.00 noon
Venue: ATREE terrace
Here's the Concept Note
This note advocates the application of Knowledge Management for sustainable management of natural resources. Knowledge Management for Natural Resources Management (KM4NRM) will constitute a new avenue of research to address the challenges of sustaining human life on Earth - sustainably.
Knowledge Management (KM) is the phrase used for the process through which business organizations generate value from their intellectual and knowledge-based assets. Being closely associated with and mostly confined to high-end business, KM is often misunderstood as a synonym of Information Technology (IT). While KM is facilitated by IT, IT by itself is not KM.
KM systems do not have to be computer systems. It is a process of finding, selecting, organizing, distilling and presenting information in a way that improves comprehension in a specific area of interest (http://presidentofindia.nic.in/scripts/sllatest1.jsp?id=282) and acquiring, storing and utilizing knowledge for such things as problem solving, strategic planning, decision making and dynamic learning. This involves the whole gamut of transforming data into knowledge, managing knowledge as well generating new knowledge.
KM systems do not have to be computer systems. It is a process of finding, selecting, organizing, distilling and presenting information in a way that improves comprehension in a specific area of interest (http://presidentofindia.nic.in/scripts/sllatest1.jsp?id=282) and acquiring, storing and utilizing knowledge for such things as problem solving, strategic planning, decision making and dynamic learning. This involves the whole gamut of transforming data into knowledge, managing knowledge as well generating new knowledge.
Data, Information, Knowledge and Wisdom
Without reference to either space or time, data is just a meaningless point. It is like an event out of context. The key concept is being ‘out of context’ and hence it conveys little meaning. When we encounter a piece of data, our first action is usually to attempt to find a way to attribute meaning to it. We do this by associating it with other things. For example, the data 33, 26 alone conveys little meaning. When the same data is suffixed with 0 Celsius, it immediately makes sense. Similarly, a time reference can be associated with the data, this might be, ‘temperature of day’ ’temperature of night’, etc. The implications being; when there is no context, there is no meaning and more information (here context) increases certainty.
That a collection of data is not information implies that a collection of data for which there is no relation between the pieces is not information. The pieces of data may represent information, yet whether or not it is information, depends on the understanding of the one perceiving the data. Information is quite simply an understanding of the relationships between pieces of data, or between pieces of data and other information. [Neil Fleming, Coping with a Revolution: Will the Internet Change Learning? Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand]
While information entails an understanding of the relations between data, it generally does not provide a foundation for why the data is what it is, nor an indication as to how the data is likely to change over time. Beyond relation there is pattern. When a pattern relation exists amidst the data and information, the pattern has the potential to represent knowledge. It only becomes knowledge, when one is able to realize and understand the patterns and their implications. Wisdom arises when one understands the foundational principles responsible for the patterns representing knowledge being what they are. The embedded figure depicts the transition of data to wisdom.
Value of KM
Value of KM
In an organizational context, data represents facts or values of results that have the capacity to represent information. Patterns of relations in data and information and other patterns have the capacity to represent knowledge. For the representation to be of any utility it must be understood, and when understood the representation is information or knowledge to the one that understands.
Traditional view of Knowledge Management treats knowledge in terms of prepackaged interpretation of information, residing in technological databases. This view works against generation of multiple and sometimes-contradictory views that are much needed to address the new challenges. Information residing in the technological databases as bits or pixels are distinct from knowledge. Knowledge resides in the user and not in the database.
Knowledge Management caters to the critical issue of organizational adaptation, survival and competence in the face of increasingly discontinuous environmental change. It embodies processes that seek synergistic combination of data and information-processing capacity and the creative and innovative capacity of human beings. [Malhotra, Y. Information Ecology and Knowledge Management: Towards Knowledge Ecology for Hyperturbulant Organizational Environments, Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 2002, UESCO/Eolss Publishers, Oxford, UK]
The value of Knowledge Management relates directly to the effectiveness with which the managed knowledge enables the members of the organization to deal with today's situations and effectively envision and create their future. In essence, KM tries to understand the situation and processes from a system perspective to arrive at a decision. From a business perspective, it tries to extract tacit knowledge of the employees and utilize it for decision-making. Explicit knowledge is everything that is written down or otherwise encoded. Tacit knowledge, by contrast, exists largely in employee's heads. Today managers are forced to look for ways to add value by taking advantage of uncertainty.
Although uncertainty is usually seen as negative, it can also increase performance if flexibility is incorporated into the system to capture upside opportunities, and reduce losses in case of downside events. Knowledge Management is this complex process that is becoming more and more important to organizational success.
KM for NRM
Natural systems and processes are either (i) too slow to observe and study in a lifetime (evolution) (ii) abrupt and hence not predictable yet (natural disaster – a misnomer)
(iii) too subtle to be taken note of (alterations/adaptations) or
(iv) too big to comprehend completely (hydrologic cycle). Our attempts to understand / quantify natural processes, as functions of space and time are based on generalizations and assumptions. The abstractions impede any blanket/ universal recommendation for specific natural resource management. Neither is it surprising to find any NRM decision not getting criticized.
The efficiency of NRM decision is limited by gaps in our understanding of the interdependencies of the individual processes. The challenge for the 21st century science is to understand Earth's bio-geo-physical processes and how it shapes the global environmental systems, on which all of life depends. This knowledge is critical to science and society for rational policy for managing natural systems, sustaining human health, maintaining economic stability, and improving the quality of human life.
Understanding the intricacies of global bio-geo-physical processes requires assiduously synchronized, global efforts. It is here that natural resource managers/ scientists need to learn from their corporate counterparts and look for ways to add value by taking advantage of uncertainty. NRM studies are based on observations, analysis, interpretation and implementation. As an environmental scientist/ ecologist you would now be able to appreciate how the data that you collect gets transformed into knowledge or wisdom. Contrary to business processes, which have limited personnel to pool knowledge from, KM for NRM can pool knowledge and wisdom from entire population and even from people across geographic or administrative boundaries.
It is surprisingly strange that, KM has confined itself mostly to business enterprises. The author foresees enormous potential of KM4NRM. However, the domain is too nascent to cite any academic/ research precedence. The note concludes with a request to streamline your thoughts and scan your noosphere to discover the potentials of knowledge management for natural resources management. The author is convinced that KM4NRM is pivotal to sustainable natural resource(s) management.
It is surprisingly strange that, KM has confined itself mostly to business enterprises. The author foresees enormous potential of KM4NRM. However, the domain is too nascent to cite any academic/ research precedence. The note concludes with a request to streamline your thoughts and scan your noosphere to discover the potentials of knowledge management for natural resources management. The author is convinced that KM4NRM is pivotal to sustainable natural resource(s) management.
Acknowledgments
Dr. C.S.P. Iyer, IIITM-K
Dr. V. Sobha, University of Kerala
Dr. K. Srinivasan, IIITM-K
Dr. K.R. Srivathsan, IIITM-K
Dr. C.S.P. Iyer, IIITM-K
Dr. V. Sobha, University of Kerala
Dr. K. Srinivasan, IIITM-K
Dr. K.R. Srivathsan, IIITM-K
Contributed by Mrs Kalpana Prasanna, Human Reources Officer, ATREE
Thursday, August 16, 2007
EIH withdraws Floating Hotel Project on Hebbal Lake
You can read the full story here at :
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Bangalore/Green_protest_sinks_floating_eatery/articleshow/2283664.cms
Contributed by Nikhil Lele, Senior Research Associate, ATREE
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Bangalore/Green_protest_sinks_floating_eatery/articleshow/2283664.cms
Contributed by Nikhil Lele, Senior Research Associate, ATREE
Appeal
Dear Friends,
This is a critical time. The European Commission (EC) is currently revising the law - known as Directive 86/609 - that governs animal experiments across Europe. 86/609 is a hugely powerful Directive that has power of life and death over millions of animals across the continent - setting out minimum standards for how and whether animals can be used in experiments.
A staggering ten million animals are used in outdated and wasteful experiments in European laboratories every year. The Directive is supposed to ensure "the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes" but the huge numbers show that it’s just not doing that. There is a real possibility that with enough support the EC will ban all primate tests as part of the revised law.
Written Declaration 40/2007 urges the European Parliament to use the revision process of Directive 86/609/EC as an opportunity to establish a timetable for replacing the use of all primates in scientific experiments with alternatives. The Declaration will fall on 7th September and the signatures of half the MEPs in the Parliament is needed by then.
If you care about animals visit the following webpage to urge them to sign Written Declaration 40/2007 at http://www.navs.org.uk/take_action/39/0/885/
If you want to do more:-
Please write to the European Commission and ask them to ban primate tests. To help, a prepared letter can be found at http://www.eceae.org/saveprimates/en/action.html
The address is:-
Mr. Stavros Dimas Commissioner for Environment European Commission B-1049, Brussels, Belgium
For more information:-
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2987
http://www.buav.org/
Thank You
Tony Gallett
tony_gal_001@yahoo.co.uk
This is a critical time. The European Commission (EC) is currently revising the law - known as Directive 86/609 - that governs animal experiments across Europe. 86/609 is a hugely powerful Directive that has power of life and death over millions of animals across the continent - setting out minimum standards for how and whether animals can be used in experiments.
A staggering ten million animals are used in outdated and wasteful experiments in European laboratories every year. The Directive is supposed to ensure "the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes" but the huge numbers show that it’s just not doing that. There is a real possibility that with enough support the EC will ban all primate tests as part of the revised law.
Written Declaration 40/2007 urges the European Parliament to use the revision process of Directive 86/609/EC as an opportunity to establish a timetable for replacing the use of all primates in scientific experiments with alternatives. The Declaration will fall on 7th September and the signatures of half the MEPs in the Parliament is needed by then.
If you care about animals visit the following webpage to urge them to sign Written Declaration 40/2007 at http://www.navs.org.uk/take_action/39/0/885/
If you want to do more:-
Please write to the European Commission and ask them to ban primate tests. To help, a prepared letter can be found at http://www.eceae.org/saveprimates/en/action.html
The address is:-
Mr. Stavros Dimas Commissioner for Environment European Commission B-1049, Brussels, Belgium
For more information:-
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2987
http://www.buav.org/
Thank You
Tony Gallett
tony_gal_001@yahoo.co.uk
2nd International Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations
Venue: Kerala 21-24th March 2008
"Creating better places for people to live in and for people to visit"
Kerala Tourism, along with International Centre for Responsible Tourism (ICRT) India, is organizing the Second International Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations. The Conference will be held in March 2008 in Cochin, Kerala and will provide an excellent opportunity to learn more about what has been achieved and to discuss how to move the agenda forward.
21st March : an Academic Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations
22nd -24th March : the 2nd International Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations.
Please put these dates in your diary and spread the word.
If you would like to present a paper at the academic conference please email Professor Harold Goodwin
If you would like to be kept informed of the details of the conference please register online here
Details of a wide range of accommodation options from home stays to five star; flight options and registration fees will be available shortly.
Kerala has experienced very rapid growth in visitor numbers, with around 6 million domestic and 0.5 million international visitors in 2006. The WTTC has identified Kerala as the destination with the highest forecast annual growth over the next few years. In this context the Kerala government has recognized the importance of engaging with all the stakeholders to pursue a responsible tourism initiative.
The Second International Conference on Responsible Tourism will be a follow up to the Cape Town Conference held in 2002 and, will be looking at the development of Responsible Tourism in the last 5 years in Kerala, The Gambia, South Africa and a number of other destinations .
The Kerala Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations in March 2008 is being jointly chaired by Dr Venu V, Secretary of Kerala Tourism and Professor Harold Goodwin of the International Centre for Responsible Tourism (ICRT) at Leeds Metropolitan University
The objectives of the conference are to:
"Creating better places for people to live in and for people to visit"
Kerala Tourism, along with International Centre for Responsible Tourism (ICRT) India, is organizing the Second International Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations. The Conference will be held in March 2008 in Cochin, Kerala and will provide an excellent opportunity to learn more about what has been achieved and to discuss how to move the agenda forward.
21st March : an Academic Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations
22nd -24th March : the 2nd International Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations.
Please put these dates in your diary and spread the word.
If you would like to present a paper at the academic conference please email Professor Harold Goodwin
If you would like to be kept informed of the details of the conference please register online here
Details of a wide range of accommodation options from home stays to five star; flight options and registration fees will be available shortly.
Kerala has experienced very rapid growth in visitor numbers, with around 6 million domestic and 0.5 million international visitors in 2006. The WTTC has identified Kerala as the destination with the highest forecast annual growth over the next few years. In this context the Kerala government has recognized the importance of engaging with all the stakeholders to pursue a responsible tourism initiative.
The Second International Conference on Responsible Tourism will be a follow up to the Cape Town Conference held in 2002 and, will be looking at the development of Responsible Tourism in the last 5 years in Kerala, The Gambia, South Africa and a number of other destinations .
The Kerala Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations in March 2008 is being jointly chaired by Dr Venu V, Secretary of Kerala Tourism and Professor Harold Goodwin of the International Centre for Responsible Tourism (ICRT) at Leeds Metropolitan University
The objectives of the conference are to:
- Review progress towards Responsible Tourism around the world since 2002, including initiatives in destinations and the initiatives of hotels and tour operators.
- Reflect on Kerala’s experience of working towards being a Responsible Tourism destination and to share experience internationally.
- Discuss how tourism can contribute to local economic development and poverty reduction
consider how the environmental impact so the industry can best be managed. - Discuss the ways in which tourism can contribute to social development and mutual understanding and respectful encounters between tourists and local people.
For further information contact : http://www.rtd2kerala.org/ or #7, 1st Floor, 7th Main Indiranagar 2nd Stage, Bangalore 560 038 India. Tel +91.80.41152218 Mob +91.9886753286
Conference Organizers
Dr Venu Vasudevan, Secretary of Tourism, Kerala Government
Gopinath Parayil, Managing Trustee,ICRT India
Prof Harold Goodwin, Director ICRT Leeds Metropolitan University UK
Contributed by Dr Priyadarsanan Dharma Rajan, Fellow, ATREE
Friday, August 3, 2007
PES Lessons from Costa Rica
Here's an interesting article written by Ms Rohini Nilekani, Executive Board Member, ATREE published in today's Hindu.
Contributed by Nithin, ATREE Librarian
Workshop on Biodiversity databases, Eco-informatics and Niche Modelling tools at EIC
Dear Friends,
The Eco-Informatics Centre is organizing a one day workshop on 31 st August, 2007 at ATREE. Dr Townsend Peterson from the University of Kansas and Dr Shaily Menon from the Grant Valley University are the resource persons on this day.
Dr Peterson will give two talks on biodiversity databases and informatics to applications of ecological niche modeling in a wide range of areas from testing hypotheses related to species distribution and biogeography presentation. One of the talks will be tailored to a more general audience of ATREE and the second one will be more specialized for those interested in exploring how to apply it to their current research. Dr Shaily Menon will present her work on Asian nuthatch ecology and geography. The afternoon session will cover technical details of Niche Modelling tools, followed by a discussion session.
All of you are invited to attend the presentations and to be a part of the discussion session. I will update you with details (time and topics of their presentations) soon. Please mark the dates in your diary.
Best Regards,
Maya Rajasekharan
_________________________________
Co-ordinator
Eco-informatics Centre
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)
Hebbal, Bangalore, India
e-mail: maya.rajasekharan@atree.org
Website: http://www.ecoinfoindia.org/
Phone: +91 80 23638771 ext-35
Fax: +91 80 23530070
Maya Rajasekharan
_________________________________
Co-ordinator
Eco-informatics Centre
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)
Hebbal, Bangalore, India
e-mail: maya.rajasekharan@atree.org
Website: http://www.ecoinfoindia.org/
Phone: +91 80 23638771 ext-35
Fax: +91 80 23530070
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Rare butterflies, moths and beetles stolen from Himalayan forests
Check out this news at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/6916134.stm
Contributed by Dr. K.N.Ganeshiah, Trustee and Executive Board Member, ATREE, and Professor, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore
Contributed by Dr. K.N.Ganeshiah, Trustee and Executive Board Member, ATREE, and Professor, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore
SSCP inspires debate on what is public purpose
2nd Aug, 2007, 0445 hrs IST,
Jacob John
Whether it is the opposition parties asking for the justification of the public purpose behind the land acquisition at Singur, or the Supreme Court querying the largescale acquisition of land from farmers, the meaning of public purpose is today under scrutiny. Traditionally, the public purpose doctrine has been for public infrastructure projects like electricity, roads, railways and other projects that were deemed to be of strategic or particular importance.
The Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP) is similarly justified, with project proponents stating that it would save up to 36 hours of shipping time. However, the detailed project report (DPR) itself states that the biggest saving will be for journeys from Tuticorin to Chennai, and it will, in fact, be 30 hours and not 36 as frequently claimed.
Recently, many naval experts have repeatedly stated that with the exception of voyages from ports on the Indian west coast to the Indian east coast, there are unlikely to be any significant gains for ships that are making the voyage through the Sethusamudram canal. This information is not reflected in the L&T Ramboll DPR, as it assumes that voyages for all ships begin either at Tuticorin or Kanyakumari. The savings for these ships may be acceptable: a reduction in time between 10 and 30 hours. In dollar terms, a 20,000 dead weight tonne (DWT) ship save about $17,962 per voyage as per DPR. DPR hopes to charge 50% of this amount ($8,981) for ships using the canal. This represents a saving in time charter and fuel costs for ships using the canal.
For ships coming from places like Europe and Africa, the average savings is just 8 hours! A journey from Mauritius to Kolkata would actually be longer by nearly four hours for an average ship. The average savings for a 20,000 DWT ship, making a voyage from either Europe or Africa, is just $3,989: just 22% of the savings projected in DPR. The lack of gains for ships from Africa and Europe may not have been significant had it been a part of the project design and factored in the risks of the project.
However, 65% of the voyages (and hence revenue), as per DPR, originate from Africa, the Middle East and Europe. For ships from Africa and Europe, using the canal would mean making a loss of $4,992 on every voyage at the proposed tariff structure. Ships could be incentivised to use the canal (by reducing tariff rates). The catch with that scenario is that the pre-tax IRR of the project then falls to just 2.6%! This is a level at which even public infrastructure projects are usually rejected.
The project rests on a set of assumptions that are fundamentally flawed. It assumes savings for all ships are the same while they are actually very different. The public purpose of a reduction in shipping time is, in fact, not valid for most of the ships using the canal. Neither does the project provide revenue for the government. If the aim of the government is to boost shipping along the peninsula, there are very good alternatives. The annual interest savings of the project could provide a subsidy of around Rs 250 crore that could be spent on upgrading the ports in Tuticorin and Chennai, as well as providing a subsidy to all ships calling at these ports.
Central to the debate on the public purpose of SSCP is the idea of public purpose itself. While projects are routinely justified on the grounds of a larger public purpose, there is little scrutiny or accountability to the public purpose that has been used to justify it. If SSCP does not benefit the number of ships outlined in DPR, what are the mechanisms to ensure that the country at worst cuts its losses and at best penalises the project promoters?
Building in an accountability mechanism to make sure that projects like SSCP do not prove to be a constant drain on the economy is an important step that we need to take to scrutinise the very generously overused terms of public purpose. It will help build realism into the project design unlike the present where there is an incentive to exaggerate the benefits while neglecting or minimising cost.
(The author is a infrastructure economist) Email: j.t.john@gmail.com [This article is an abridged version of a chapter from a larger report titled ‘Review of Environmental and Economic Impacts of the SSCP’ by Sudarshan Rodriguez, Jacob John, Rohan Arthur, Kartik Shanker and Aarthi Sridhar which is to be published soon.]
The Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP) is similarly justified, with project proponents stating that it would save up to 36 hours of shipping time. However, the detailed project report (DPR) itself states that the biggest saving will be for journeys from Tuticorin to Chennai, and it will, in fact, be 30 hours and not 36 as frequently claimed.
Recently, many naval experts have repeatedly stated that with the exception of voyages from ports on the Indian west coast to the Indian east coast, there are unlikely to be any significant gains for ships that are making the voyage through the Sethusamudram canal. This information is not reflected in the L&T Ramboll DPR, as it assumes that voyages for all ships begin either at Tuticorin or Kanyakumari. The savings for these ships may be acceptable: a reduction in time between 10 and 30 hours. In dollar terms, a 20,000 dead weight tonne (DWT) ship save about $17,962 per voyage as per DPR. DPR hopes to charge 50% of this amount ($8,981) for ships using the canal. This represents a saving in time charter and fuel costs for ships using the canal.
For ships coming from places like Europe and Africa, the average savings is just 8 hours! A journey from Mauritius to Kolkata would actually be longer by nearly four hours for an average ship. The average savings for a 20,000 DWT ship, making a voyage from either Europe or Africa, is just $3,989: just 22% of the savings projected in DPR. The lack of gains for ships from Africa and Europe may not have been significant had it been a part of the project design and factored in the risks of the project.
However, 65% of the voyages (and hence revenue), as per DPR, originate from Africa, the Middle East and Europe. For ships from Africa and Europe, using the canal would mean making a loss of $4,992 on every voyage at the proposed tariff structure. Ships could be incentivised to use the canal (by reducing tariff rates). The catch with that scenario is that the pre-tax IRR of the project then falls to just 2.6%! This is a level at which even public infrastructure projects are usually rejected.
The project rests on a set of assumptions that are fundamentally flawed. It assumes savings for all ships are the same while they are actually very different. The public purpose of a reduction in shipping time is, in fact, not valid for most of the ships using the canal. Neither does the project provide revenue for the government. If the aim of the government is to boost shipping along the peninsula, there are very good alternatives. The annual interest savings of the project could provide a subsidy of around Rs 250 crore that could be spent on upgrading the ports in Tuticorin and Chennai, as well as providing a subsidy to all ships calling at these ports.
Central to the debate on the public purpose of SSCP is the idea of public purpose itself. While projects are routinely justified on the grounds of a larger public purpose, there is little scrutiny or accountability to the public purpose that has been used to justify it. If SSCP does not benefit the number of ships outlined in DPR, what are the mechanisms to ensure that the country at worst cuts its losses and at best penalises the project promoters?
Building in an accountability mechanism to make sure that projects like SSCP do not prove to be a constant drain on the economy is an important step that we need to take to scrutinise the very generously overused terms of public purpose. It will help build realism into the project design unlike the present where there is an incentive to exaggerate the benefits while neglecting or minimising cost.
(The author is a infrastructure economist) Email: j.t.john@gmail.com [This article is an abridged version of a chapter from a larger report titled ‘Review of Environmental and Economic Impacts of the SSCP’ by Sudarshan Rodriguez, Jacob John, Rohan Arthur, Kartik Shanker and Aarthi Sridhar which is to be published soon.]
A larger version of this article was published in the Economic and Political Weekly, VOL 42 No. 29 July 21 - July 27, 2007.
www.epw.org.in/epw/uploads/articles/10823.pdf http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/Policy/SSCP_inspires_debate_on_what_is_public_purpose/articleshow/2249751.cms
Contributed by Sudarshan Rodriguez, Senior Research Associate, Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE) Mobile: +91 9840680127
Email: sudarshanr@yahoo.com
Address for correspondence :
CHENNAI
Flat 2B, Aditya Apartments,
38 Balakrishna Road,
Valmiki Nagar, Thiruvanmiyur,
Chennai-600 041
Tamil Nadu, India.
Phone:+91 44 420 19470
Fax: +91 44 420 19468
BANGALORE
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment
No 659, 5th ‘A” Main, Hebbal,
Bangalore 560024
Direct line: 080 - 65356130
Tel: +91 80 23533942, 23530069, 23638771
Fax: +91 80 23530070
Post- Tsunami Environment Initiative
(http://www.ptei-india.org/)
CHENNAI
Flat 2B, Aditya Apartments,
38 Balakrishna Road,
Valmiki Nagar, Thiruvanmiyur,
Chennai-600 041
Tamil Nadu, India.
Phone:+91 44 420 19470
Fax: +91 44 420 19468
BANGALORE
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment
No 659, 5th ‘A” Main, Hebbal,
Bangalore 560024
Direct line: 080 - 65356130
Tel: +91 80 23533942, 23530069, 23638771
Fax: +91 80 23530070
Post- Tsunami Environment Initiative
(http://www.ptei-india.org/)
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
Here's a nice article about Dr Vanaja Ramprasad and her work
Saviour extraordinaire
Sumana Bharadwaj
Dr Vanaja Ramprasad, a gutsy lady who had dedicated her life to saving biodiversity believes that unless small farmers are saved from the onslaught of global pressures and indigenous crops revived, we are looking at a bleak future.
At first glance, she seems like any other grandmother playing with her granddaughter in her study amidst piles and piles of books on a wide range of subjects, including books authored by her. But what belies the seeming ordinariness is the extraordinary and exemplary work she has done to preserve biodiversity and help the small and marginal farmers in the semi-arid regions of south India. Meet Dr Vanaja Ramprasad, Director of Genetic Resource Ecology Energy Nutrition (GREEN) Foundation (GF).
A nutritionist by training, Dr Vanaja has dedicated herself to the cause of empowering the custodians of our biodiversity, the food producers of our country — the small farmers from the backward regions. Her vision, along with her team of committed individuals at GF, is to help them lead a life of dignity and to help sustain their livelihood in agriculture in a manner which is both ecologically and economically viable while at the same time ensuring food security for one and all.The beginningWhat started off as a quest for answers to the paradox surrounding her during her career at the Community Health Centre in the 70s, eventually culminated in the movement called GF.
It was the decade of the Green Revolution and the entire nation was rejoicing over it, while she was treating children for malnourishment! So Dr Vanaja set off on a mission to find answers. She worked with various other grassroot organisations and after years of research, the answers to her search slowly began to unravel. As the connection between food production and poverty became clearer, Dr Vanaja realised that, poverty is not result of lack of development, poor technology or scarce resources, but is, ironically, the manifestation of the extensive and invisible costs of resource intensive and resource destructive processes, which form the very foundations of a 'developed nation'.
She was convinced that the western model of development while seemingly offered solutions, was simply not sustainable and was in fact depleting and polluting natural resources. And finally, it was the small farmers in backward areas who bore the brunt of it all, steeped in debts and dying from hunger. Most of us are looking westwards for solutions to problems of poverty and underdevelopment, which have come to falsely mean not having high consumptive power and lifestyles perched on western science and technology, with the naïve belief that by increasing investments, creating jobs and raising incomes, poverty can be eliminated.
But Dr Vanaja firmly rooted in her convictions, believes that unless the small farms are saved from the onslaught of global pressures and traditional agricultural practices and indigenous crops are revived and the fast dwindling biodiversity conserved, we are looking at a bleak future. This eventually led to the emergence of Green Foundation as a proactive initiative to empower the small farmer by conserving agricultural diversity through a network of seed banks across the state.
Green Foundation was thus formalised as an organisation in 1996 with 5 farmers and a handful of seeds in 2 villages and the whole team of committed individuals GF today boasts of about 2,000 farmers in 161 villages who participate in seed conservation programs through out Karnataka. And since its inception, GF has facilitated conservation of approximately 382 indigenous seed varieties of millet, paddy, vegetable and oil seeds, which would have otherwise been threatened by extinction due to non-organic farming practices. In the process, the movement has been instrumental in elevating the economic status of the rural women and revival of traditional farming methods and culture.
GF was awarded the United Nations’ Equator Initiative Prize in recognition of its outstanding community effort for reduction of poverty and biodiversity conservation over a decade. Among the various programmes run by GF towards this purpose are the concepts of kitchen garden, the one-acre integrated farming practice, and community farming for landless farmers, integrated agroforestry and livestock management to meet the community's need for fodder and fuel and reduce dependence on external inputs, training programmess to encourage community participation, essential for conserving biodiversity, community marketing programs to market the wholesome, healthy food products directly to consumers and holding workshops/seminars/conferences by linking with other organisationss to bring in policy changes.
The future
Looking back, the results that Dr Vanaja's efforts have brought, fills her with hope that things can be changed and by anyone too. The degree of devastation that the earth has seen in just the last 6-7 decades is enormously high and there is still so much to be done, says Dr Vanaja. And so, Dr Vanaja will continue to do her 'bit' to the society for as long as she can, even as she modestly says, "I haven't done anything"! And the least, we the people from 'developed cities', can do, is to applaud her single handed efforts in trying to bridge the big gap between the producer and consumer, which is central to saving our environment.
here's the link to the article published in Deccan Herald http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Jul282007/she2007072715482.asp
Contributed by Ms Kalpana Prasanna, Executive Assistant to the Director, ATREE
Sumana Bharadwaj
Dr Vanaja Ramprasad, a gutsy lady who had dedicated her life to saving biodiversity believes that unless small farmers are saved from the onslaught of global pressures and indigenous crops revived, we are looking at a bleak future.
At first glance, she seems like any other grandmother playing with her granddaughter in her study amidst piles and piles of books on a wide range of subjects, including books authored by her. But what belies the seeming ordinariness is the extraordinary and exemplary work she has done to preserve biodiversity and help the small and marginal farmers in the semi-arid regions of south India. Meet Dr Vanaja Ramprasad, Director of Genetic Resource Ecology Energy Nutrition (GREEN) Foundation (GF).
A nutritionist by training, Dr Vanaja has dedicated herself to the cause of empowering the custodians of our biodiversity, the food producers of our country — the small farmers from the backward regions. Her vision, along with her team of committed individuals at GF, is to help them lead a life of dignity and to help sustain their livelihood in agriculture in a manner which is both ecologically and economically viable while at the same time ensuring food security for one and all.The beginningWhat started off as a quest for answers to the paradox surrounding her during her career at the Community Health Centre in the 70s, eventually culminated in the movement called GF.
It was the decade of the Green Revolution and the entire nation was rejoicing over it, while she was treating children for malnourishment! So Dr Vanaja set off on a mission to find answers. She worked with various other grassroot organisations and after years of research, the answers to her search slowly began to unravel. As the connection between food production and poverty became clearer, Dr Vanaja realised that, poverty is not result of lack of development, poor technology or scarce resources, but is, ironically, the manifestation of the extensive and invisible costs of resource intensive and resource destructive processes, which form the very foundations of a 'developed nation'.
She was convinced that the western model of development while seemingly offered solutions, was simply not sustainable and was in fact depleting and polluting natural resources. And finally, it was the small farmers in backward areas who bore the brunt of it all, steeped in debts and dying from hunger. Most of us are looking westwards for solutions to problems of poverty and underdevelopment, which have come to falsely mean not having high consumptive power and lifestyles perched on western science and technology, with the naïve belief that by increasing investments, creating jobs and raising incomes, poverty can be eliminated.
But Dr Vanaja firmly rooted in her convictions, believes that unless the small farms are saved from the onslaught of global pressures and traditional agricultural practices and indigenous crops are revived and the fast dwindling biodiversity conserved, we are looking at a bleak future. This eventually led to the emergence of Green Foundation as a proactive initiative to empower the small farmer by conserving agricultural diversity through a network of seed banks across the state.
Green Foundation was thus formalised as an organisation in 1996 with 5 farmers and a handful of seeds in 2 villages and the whole team of committed individuals GF today boasts of about 2,000 farmers in 161 villages who participate in seed conservation programs through out Karnataka. And since its inception, GF has facilitated conservation of approximately 382 indigenous seed varieties of millet, paddy, vegetable and oil seeds, which would have otherwise been threatened by extinction due to non-organic farming practices. In the process, the movement has been instrumental in elevating the economic status of the rural women and revival of traditional farming methods and culture.
GF was awarded the United Nations’ Equator Initiative Prize in recognition of its outstanding community effort for reduction of poverty and biodiversity conservation over a decade. Among the various programmes run by GF towards this purpose are the concepts of kitchen garden, the one-acre integrated farming practice, and community farming for landless farmers, integrated agroforestry and livestock management to meet the community's need for fodder and fuel and reduce dependence on external inputs, training programmess to encourage community participation, essential for conserving biodiversity, community marketing programs to market the wholesome, healthy food products directly to consumers and holding workshops/seminars/conferences by linking with other organisationss to bring in policy changes.
The future
Looking back, the results that Dr Vanaja's efforts have brought, fills her with hope that things can be changed and by anyone too. The degree of devastation that the earth has seen in just the last 6-7 decades is enormously high and there is still so much to be done, says Dr Vanaja. And so, Dr Vanaja will continue to do her 'bit' to the society for as long as she can, even as she modestly says, "I haven't done anything"! And the least, we the people from 'developed cities', can do, is to applaud her single handed efforts in trying to bridge the big gap between the producer and consumer, which is central to saving our environment.
here's the link to the article published in Deccan Herald http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Jul282007/she2007072715482.asp
Contributed by Ms Kalpana Prasanna, Executive Assistant to the Director, ATREE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
