The environmental consciousness in the West has been corresponding to the growth of socialism and the issues about equity and justice. Despite some hiccups, the Greens and the Socialist remained allies in Europe, Australia and Canada and the environmentalists have been a part of radical conglomerate. There has been a co-existence and convergence of environmental issues and those of justice and equality in the larger movement against globalisation and liberalisation all over the world. However, in India, there always have been differences among various categories of the Left following the dichotomy of environment versus development. The tensions arise when the environmentalists do not pay heed to the rights of the communities living on natural resources and the Left accuses the environmental and ecological organisations being away from the larger issues of equity, justice and development. A coming together of these two sections is the need of the day when both equity and environment are at stake as the distorted development agenda is pushed ahead by the capitalist forces within India and at the global level.

A qualitatively different perspective and action emerged out of the people’s movements since the 1980s. A large number of communities living on the natural resources took up the emerging challenges, going beyond the previous ideologies and integrating those to define the development with the due place for ecological concerns in the new paradigm. They not only developed a strong critique of the development policies and projects, but also took to action stalling ecologically destructive projects while proposing the alternatives. The Chipko Andolan, the Silent Valley movement, the fishworkers’ movement or the tribals’ movements for the land rights and the struggles against the large projects by the displaced and affected went beyond seeking a pie in the cake of development, evolving a new trend in environmentalism.


New Trade Unionism

The new trade unionism by the movements like the Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha or the Kanoria Jute Mill Labour Union in West Bengal have combined the agitation and constructive work with a larger politics in mind. The groups fighting for the rights of the Bhopal Gas tragedy have raised the issues beyond compensation and punishing the company, questioning the prevalent industrialisation, corporate irresponsibility and exploitation in the name of development. The labour force, wherever displaced and challenged, rallied in unison not only on the labour issues alone, but on all other issues that affected their community, employment and environment – the three aspects of life. Simultaneously began a phase of initiating and experimenting alternative technology as a solution to capital-intensive industrialism, to protect the labour and environment.

Hundreds of organisations and groups are engaged in the field of land reforms, alternative land, water and energy management. Applying scientific knowledge and method to their work, while understanding its politics and linkages with the larger systemic struggle, changing the basic power relations and decision-making processes in favour of the underprivileged classes thus became a common bond between those in struggle and reconstruction. There were tensions and dilemma that led to further dialogue, which partly changed discourse on development.

In this process, the organisations also challenged the large dams as symbols of prevalent development paradigm, as they caused largescale displacement, destruction and disparity. This raised the question whether such large structures and storages can be considered as development without assessing and analyzing their short and long-term impacts. The struggle in the Narmada valley against the Sardar Sarovar Project that began more than 19 years ago with raising social, environmental and economic issues about such projects, inevitably led to rigorous analysis of these aspects and questioning the role of the World Bank as a financier, which made the Bank to withdraw from the project. It challenged the public purpose claimed to be behind the project, based on the review of the benefits to the drought affected, with evident overestimation, unreliability and unjust distribution. While the struggle continues beyond the Supreme Court’s judgement, the dam stands exposed on the impossibility of resettling remaining 40,000 families with no land in sight, though the people’s struggle compelled the government to allot land for resettlement of about 11,000 families. The destruction of the environment and the source of livelihood for generations and potential for further development, at the huge cost and claims of benefits stand exposed – all this leads to the debate about the right option in land and water management and the alternative eco-development. A large scale, yet considered to be a micro- level issue, thus reflects the macro-level challenge of centralisation and globalisation in development planning.



Displacement and Labour

The movements against displacement and prevalent development projects have brought out the fact that there is no realistic and honest impact assessment of these projects and the livelihood losses are never accounted in its entirety. The roles of the Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Social Justice in this respect are reduced to a naught. They have merely become endorsing bodies for the powerful ministries of Water Resources, Power and Finance.It is obvious from the largescale redistribution of land, water, forest and minerals that the rural hinterland is being extracted the resources from, to be diverted to the urban conglomerations which is against the basic principles of justice as it also violates the fundamental rights in the process . Albeit a question, who pays and who benefits is raised in the specific context of development projects, the dearth of data and analysis on such a crucial issue affecting lives of the millions is obvious. There is no doubt a need for a separate Comptroller and Auditor General for not only monitoring and assessing the loss of natural resources as livelihoods in relation to a project or plan but appraising th equity issues in allocation and redistribution of those resources as indispensible capital for development.

The environmental destruction – loss of forests and rivers, land degradation - results in loss of resources and livelihood of those who are dependent on them. The loss of fertile lands and forest land destroys the livelihood of farmers, labourers and allied village craftspeople and industries like the ironsmith and carpenter on a large scale. The loss of river displaces thousands of fisherpeople. The displacement disintegrates and impoverishes the community. The natural resources and community have been the mainstay of the sustainable livelihood in the rural and tribal India. The impact is not limited to the submergence zone alone. Such displacement, destitution and disintegration make the community powerless, unable to assert itself. The displacement and disintegration has adverse impact on the labourers and the women, who again the most depressed class in the entire societal structure. The tribals or the backward classes are made to act against the forest or natural resources – for clearfelling of forest for dam, mines and for ‘afforestation’ and against the communities dependent on these resources by the vested interests. It is imperative to realize that this game of pitting the have-nots against the victims is suicidal for both.

The prevalent model of unsustainable development is based on indiscriminate displacement and destruction of natural resources due to dams, mines and other projects. The displacement has an adverse impact on the working classes in urban and rural areas, both from organized and unorganized sectors. The degradation of resources results in the loss of livelihood opportunities. The displaced labourers in urban and rural areas are worse off than the already impoverished peasants, adivasis and lower classes. They lose their livelihood based on the forest, land and deep-rooted bonds in the villages and area. Such labourers find it hard to get work at already saturated labour markets outside their area, while they lose their own means of livelihood. Many a time, even the progressive activists claim that the new development projects, which might displace thousands, would provide new employment opportunities and that such projects may prove to be emancipatory for the labourers.

If one surveys the kind of employment generation at the new project site or even in the villages, there are mostly temporary and insecure jobs. The contractors tend to employ mostly the migrant workers on the projects, who are used as bonded labour, on meager payment and in worst work conditions. The workers cannot easily organize for their rights and they can be easily fired. The secure livelihood opportunities are replaced by the insecure contract labour system, while the local workforce becomes alienated, fragmented and flotsam migrant labour. This was clear from the experiences of labourers on the Sardar Sarovar dam, employed and later removed at will in hundreds by the infamous dam contractors, Jaiprakash Associates. The displaced people, who were employed as temporary workers find themselves in pitiable conditions. The displacement has now become a source of increasing contractual privatised work.

The displacement is bound to disrupt the livelihood and employment profile of a region. It makes the agricultural and unorganised labourers destitutes, it also robs off the livelihood based on forest (minor forest produce), river, ponds and fish. Displacement is bound to destroy the production system and organisation of labour and natural resources of that particular region, disintegrating the communities. Displacement creates isolated, fragmented individuals torn away from their context and communities. They form the major recruits in the rag-tag army of unorganized and contract labour. It further saturates the already overfull labour markets at another place.

Thus the displacement caused by the environmentally unsustainable projects like the large dams also tend to lead to growing impoverishment and loss of livelihood for workers and toiling masses. The displacement is a potential hazard for the labour and there is a need that the organized and unorganized workers must raise the issue of displacement and be a part of the anti-displacement struggle. They must also strengthen demand for a sustainable and sane way of development. That was evident in the struggles against the Enron Project, against the ports of Umargam or Vadhavan, where both the people’s movements of fishworkers or farmers and those of labourers along with progressive political forces came on one platform to oppose the anti-people policy, project and ideology. At times, however, the workers of a hazardous factory, are pitted against the villagers opposing the project, as was done by the Mavoor Gwalior Rayons in Kerala and is tried by the Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages. In the case of the Rayons factory, the management paraded workers in the polluting factory against villagers. However, after sustained agitation, the workers realised that such pollution would also affect them directly or indirectly and that the interests of workers, community and environment are identical and hence the factory had to be closed down.



Environment, Development and Labour

This kind of environmentalism is that emerged from the struggle of the victims of lopsided development in the Third World. Here ecological and sustainability concerns are intrinsically related with the people’s rights, equality, livelihood and urge for democracy. This is clear from the fact that many organisations fighting large dams and displacement due to destructive mines, unwieldy infrastructure, devastative fisheries and aqua culture are active in the campaigns and struggles against the liberalisation and privatisation policies favouring global capitalists - companies and countries. To face the onslaught on the local to national communities and livelihoods, there needs a unity of the progressive forces, which in turn can result from an ideological commonality and clarity.

Assertion of values like equality and democratic human rights as an intrinsic part of ‘development,’ is at focus. The movements of adivasis, dalits, women, workers highlighting this also project ‘livelihood of all’ as the goal and not just growth in isolation. The right over natural resources within a community whether owned or in possession to be considered as planning within an appropriate social or administrative unit becomes means to protect and ensure livelihood based on land, water, forest and fish. The farmers, fishworkers, forest-produce gatherers, all sections of labour force thus claim their first right to resources, ownership or usufructory and propagate that the community will be responsible and accountable to harnessing those resources, through an appropriate technology of their choice. They no doubt are willing to share the benefits with others, after fulfilling their own basic needs, ensuring just and equitable distribution, following a principle of subsidiarity. They cannot submit to the ‘nationalist’ or ‘globalised’ paradigms, which loot their resources and use them for consumerist objectives and profit-making of a few at the cost of many.

The radical politics – either Socialism or Communism - primarily emphasized the distribution and redistribution of the social assets and production. With all humility expressed by those in search of a discourse over a clearer vision, the new movements are now questioning the very process and technology of the production. As against capital intensive and centralized planning and technology, they follow the path of Karl Marx, Mahatma Gandhi and B R Ambedkar with maximum common denominator. Marx’s dream of proletariat’s ownership rights to means of production, Gandhi’s proposition of Gram Swaraj indicating community right to resources and Ambedkar’s struggle for dalit rights to local water bodies is reflected into the ideology and movements of the neo-Left or the neo-Socialists. The more participatory and democratic approach to resource management is an avowed goal of these movements who struggle against both the Statist and capitalist modes and structures, evolving alternative ones for harnessing, production, and distributive processes. This will come true only if the unprecedented onslaught, simultaneously on the living human communities and human labour as also the environment as a source of livelihood is challenged and opposed through an inevitable alliance among the trade unions, people’s movements, constructive groups, within the country and abroad with a convergence of ideology and strategy for a united struggle.