Firing up the atomic energy establishment

The department of atomic energy has been the proverbial white elephant—long on promises and short on delivery

Ambitious and well-intentioned as it may be, the department of atomic energy’s (DAE’s) recent proposal to build 12 nuclear reactors to boost power generation in the country needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. In recent decades, DAE has been long on promises and short on delivery—the proverbial white elephant.

Yet it was not always so. When India’s nuclear establishment got under way in 1944—theoretical research had been going on since the mid-1930s, in European labs as well as in India—Homi Bhabha charted out a road map for the country’s nuclear programme for the rest of the century. In a country with appalling literacy levels, unspeakable poverty and little by way modern infrastructure, nuclear power was a bold gamble. Over the next couple of decades, a pool of talent was created, expertise was developed, and collaboration with advanced states sought. Though progress was not breakneck, it was, nonetheless, impressive. Apsara, which went critical in 1956, was Asia’s first research reactor; India’s first power reactor, Tarapur, came online in 1969.

With the exception of an eight-year gap between 1972 and 1980, DAE has been commissioning a reactor every two or three years. However, the reactors were notorious for having a low plant load factor (PLF)—in other words, they were inefficient. The popular belief is that this is largely due to unreliable supplies of uranium fuel but wear and tear and system malfunctions are as much to blame.

Second, India’s pace of nuclear energy growth is dismally slow. When France and the US decided to embrace nuclear energy in the 1960s and 1970s, the former built approximately 60 reactors within two decades and the latter about 100 in a similar time span. China has, at present, as many reactors under construction as India has built since independence. After the end of India’s ostracism from international nuclear commerce, the government ambitiously announced an increase in India’s nuclear energy generation up to 63 GW by 2032; this was drastically revised downwards to 27.5 GW. Recent statements suggest that the target may have been lowered further.

The inordinate delays from conception to commission have been fatal for the sector. The nuclear project at Gorakhpur, for example, was sanctioned in 1984 but is yet to be built; the power project at Narora took 20 years from 1972-92 to complete; the first two units at Kaiga took 15 years. The fast breeder reactor project is also languishing, while DAE has been promising to begin construction on the advanced heavy water reactor next year since 2003.

Cost overruns have also been ingrained into the Indian nuclear process—the Narora plant was sanctioned for approximately Rs200 crore but ended up costing four times that amount; the first two units at Kakrapar saw a 350% increase in cost from conception to commission. Every Indian reactor has seen similar cost spikes.

Technology assimilation has also been a tough nut for DAE. India’s third commercial nuclear power reactor, the 220 MW pressurized heavy water reactor (PHWR) at Rawatbhata, was built with technology from Canada. Since then, Indian scientists have indigenized the design and scaled it up to 540 MW and 700 MW but haven’t been able to cross the 1,000 MW mark as Canada has long done. Today, India needs larger reactors for economies of scale but DAE is yet to deliver.

To be fair, not all of the blame can be placed at DAE’s door. The international nuclear industry, for example, has been in a depressed state for a while—Westinghouse’s financial woes and Areva’s problems with steel forging were self-inflicted disasters. DAE has also had to navigate around uninspired leaders who just could not see the transformative promise of nuclear power. That has resulted in budgetary restraints, poor policies and little encouragement.

However, the atomic energy establishment does not seem to have offered much resistance to the government’s apathy; ministries normally jostle for increased budgets, influence, limelight, a place in national strategy, or a seat at the table. In some ways, the apathy has suited DAE’s own lackadaisical work habits. And the shrivelled ambitions of its Nuclear Power Corp. of India Ltd, which is responsible for the construction and operation of nuclear power reactors, hasn’t helped matters either.

Notably, the atomic community was also divided over the India-US civil nuclear deal—despite the lack of indigenous achievement in the country. It also went soft on the stringent supplier liability laws introduced in 2010 that were not in keeping with international industry norms and effectively made the Indian nuclear market a no-go zone for both foreign and domestic suppliers. Furthermore, there has been strong opposition from the atomic community to privatization under the bogey of national security—a convenient shield—against calls for transparency.

Responsibility for DAE falls on the prime minister’s shoulders. It is no coincidence that DAE’s brightest years were under Jawaharlal Nehru and the agency has been languishing somewhat ever since. Curing this white elephant is an easy process—without even getting into long-term, sustainable goals such as privatization, clear regulation and transparency, closer scrutiny by the prime minister and an adoption of the sector as he has done with solar power would go a long way in revitalizing a moribund agency.

The next phase of economic reforms

The Narendra Modi government now needs to focus on the economic policy reforms India needs over the next decade

The Narendra Modi government has done well to push ahead with key economic policy reforms that had been left on the table by the previous regime. The legal decks have been cleared for the new goods and services tax (GST) after the parliamentary vote last week. India now has a new monetary policy regime that is focused on inflation control. The new bankruptcy code will help deal with what Arvind Subramanian has described as the problem of capitalism without exit. The Fourteenth Finance Commission has given fiscal muscle to the idea of cooperative federalism. The Modi government has also dealt with the administrative tangles that almost ruined the Indian economy—ranging from the way natural resources were being allocated to the mismanagement of the food economy, to defence modernization.

The few men who matter in this government need to be asked a plain question: What now?

Deep policy reforms do not happen overnight. They are usually preceded by many years of preparatory work within government as well as outside it. The battle to introduce the GST has taken nearly 17 years. The transition from an eclectic monetary policy framework to one focused on inflation control was also preceded by almost a decade of intense debate; the Reserve Bank of India had set up a technical advisory committee for monetary policy in 2006. The path to new bankruptcy regulations that would help release capital blocked in failed enterprises was also not an easy one. Even the terms of reference were given to the Fourteenth Finance Commission in early 2013.

That is true of the 1991 economic reforms as well. The rethink on Indian economic policy began in the late 1970s with the setting up of three government committees—the first, headed by P.C. Alexander, on trade reforms, the second, by Vadilal Dagli, on controls, and the third, by L.K. Jha, on indirect tax reform. There was further work done on various policy fronts in the next decade as well. The Seventh Five-year Plan authored by a team led by Manmohan Singh argued in favour of a switch from a blind focus on capital investment to one that gave importance to higher productivity through the technological upgradation of Indian industry.

The Bharatiya Janata Party has now replaced the Congress as the hegemonic force in Indian politics. Modi would like his party to rule the country for several decades. The Prime Minister has also spoken about how India should become a $10 trillion economy by 2032. What are the next generation of economic reforms that India needs to achieve this goal? Can adequate jobs be created in the formal sector during this long transition? How can high growth be maintained in a sluggish global economy? What needs to be done to secure macroeconomic stability over the long run? How can new technology be used to rethink the contract between citizens and the state?

These are not questions for the next quarter or even the next phase of the business cycle. A lot of strategic thought needs to go into the issues before adequate policy is designed. One can find such strategic thinking in the Chinese system. The Planning Commission used to apply its intellectual capital to structural issues before it degenerated into an imperious watchman of spending programmes. The NITI Aayog is now tasked with the job. The Modi government now needs to look beyond its administrative achievements to focus on what economic policy reforms India needs over the next decade.

There have undoubtedly been some attempts. Modi had to backtrack on difficult reforms in the land and labour markets. The task has now been left to the states. But the Prime Minister deserves credit for at least putting his political capital to work in such tricky areas. The committee headed by N.K. Singh has looked at crafting a new fiscal policy framework. The Bimal Jalan committee has done the same with expenditure management. The impending introduction of GST should allow the government to focus on the other half of tax reforms—the shelved Direct Tax Code.

Planning is thankfully dead. But governments, like all organizations, need to think strategically for the long term. The introduction of GST will bring to an end an important phase in Indian economic reforms that began at the turn of the century. The government now needs to think about the next phase. Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence of such thinking as yet.

What should the next set of long-term economic reforms be? 

In energy starved Indian villages, solar mini-grids light the way

Renewable energy is key to India’s electrification plan, and mini-grids with a capacity of 10 to 500 KW are playing an increasingly important role

A dusty plastic sheet covers a large diesel generator in a corner of a petrol station in Atrauli, a village in Uttar Pradesh, a modest but telling sign of progress.

The gas station used to shut at 7pm every day because the lights would often go off, and there was no way to know when they would come back on, said Sudhakar Singh, the manager. “The main power supply was very irregular, and operating the generator was expensive, so we could not afford to stay open beyond 7pm,” Singh told the Thomson Reuters Foundation, as motorbikes and trucks lined up for petrol and diesel.

Last year, the pump got a connection to a solar mini-grid, a local power network not connected to the national grid, which guarantees six hours of electricity every day. The pump has since stayed open all night. “Now, our expenses are lower and we earn more because we can stay open all night. We have not used the generator once since we got the ... connection,” said Singh.

Power paradox

Atrauli’s electricity revolution is a symbol of the energy paradox dogging India, one of the world’s fastest growing economies, where power cuts are rampant and per capita electricity consumption is about a third the global average.

Fast-dropping costs for solar power, combined with plenty of sun and a huge need for electricity in a country where about 300 million people—a quarter of the population—are still without it means solar energy has huge potential in India.

Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s pledge to supply power to every citizen by 2019 and a surge in solar production, reaching remote villages remains a challenge, with distribution losses as high as 30% on antiquated lines, low tariffs and limited use.

Most of those without electricity live in the 99% of villages the government deems to be electrified because at least 10% of households and public places have electricity. But at least half the electrified households do not get at least six hours of electricity a day.

“While the grid has expanded and we generate enough power, distribution companies are not in a position to take that power, and are not interested in going into rural areas,” said Aruna Kumarankandath at the Centre for Science and Environment. “When the supply is so unreliable, people use it sparingly, making it an unattractive proposition to invest in,” said Kumarankandath, a renewable energy researcher.

Lights, fans, action

The situation is particularly dire in Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous state where only 37% of households are electrified, compared with 67% nationwide.

Help has come from private mini-grids like the one in Atrauli operated by OMC Power, a company with 67 grids in the state. Renewable energy is key to India’s electrification plan, and mini-grids with a capacity of 10 to 500 kilowatts (KW) are playing an increasingly important role.

“Mini-grids use the potential of untapped renewable energy and manage demand efficiently by generating power at the source of consumption,” said Kumarankandath.

A base home package from OMC Power costs Rs110 a month and comes with a switchboard with an LED bulb and a socket for charging a mobile phone. Additional lights, fans and even a television can be added.

A 50 KW solar grid with battery storage and a distribution reach of 5km can power small businesses, schools, two telecom towers and over 500 homes, said Sarraju N. Rao, chief technology officer at OMC Power. “There is enough demand in rural areas. If the supply is reliable and good, people are willing to pay more,” he said.

Local jobs

Uttar Pradesh is the only state with a policy for mini-grids. It aims to power nearly 20 million households, about a tenth of its population. The state offers a 30% subsidy for these grids, which may also be powered by wind, biomass or water, and must guarantee at least eight hours of electricity to homes, and six hours for commercial needs.

Importantly, the policy offers exit options when the areas have adequate grid supply: either the distribution company can receive energy from the mini-grids at an agreed tariff, or the project may be transferred to the distribution company.

India’s ministry for renewable energy released a national draft policy for mini- and micro-grids last June.

It aims to deploy at least 10,000 renewable energy projects in the next five years in “unserved and underserved parts of the country”, with an average capacity of 50 KW per project.

The ambitious targets come at a time when renewable energy is at a turning point in India, as generating electricity from renewables costs nearly the same as from conventional sources.

Coal still provides the lion’s share of energy, but as a signatory to the Paris Agreement on climate change, India is committed to ensuring at least 40% of its electricity will come from non-fossil-fuel sources by 2030.

A 10-year blueprint predicts 57% of India’s electricity capacity will come from non-fossil sources by 2027. Solar energy is a particular focus and will contribute 100 gigawatts (GW) of the renewable energy capacity target of 175 GW by 2022.

“Renewable energy-based mini-grids will boost small businesses, create local jobs and build economies. This will improve living standards in villages,” said Kumarankandath. “That in turn will ensure women’s empowerment, better health and education. There cannot be a better development agenda for the country,” she said.

In Atrauli, OMC’s mini-grid is just off the main road, next to the telecom tower it also helps to power. OMC has 280 customers in Atrauli, 60% of them commercial, Rao said.

One of OMC’s first customers in the village was Anita, a widowed mother of two, who didn’t have an electricity connection and used kerosene lamps for lighting in her shack.

From one base package of a single light, Anita now has three lights, one each in her room, her son’s room and the kitchen. “Earlier, the children would have to go search for a light to study by. But now they study at home, and I can do housework even at night,” she said. “I would like to add a fan next.”

The pesticide threat to public health

We must imagine how many unnecessary poisonings and deaths will occur unless synthetic pesticides are deployed with the utmost care and restraint

Anew report issued by the UN takes a controversial stance on synthetic pesticides. The conventional wisdom is that they are essential to feed the world’s growing population. But the report’s authors call our reliance on synthetic pesticides “a short-term solution that undermines the right to adequate food and health for present and future generations”. They are right.

As a scientist from Nigeria whose work focuses on controlling post-harvest losses, I have seen first-hand what happens when the use of synthetic pesticides is not properly regulated. Yet much of the world is still following the conventional wisdom, with dire consequences for public health.

The US seems poised to increase its already extensive pesticide use further. In February, former Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt was confirmed as director of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Pruitt, who sued the EPA many times in his previous job, seems intent on slashing its budget and dismantling many of its regulations, including those for pesticides, which are essential to ensuring food safety.

Anybody who consumes food grown or produced in the US should now be worried. Indeed, dismantling the EPA amounts to arming a public-health time bomb—one that has detonated repeatedly in developing countries.

In 1984, a pesticide-manufacturing plant in Bhopal, India, released 27 tonnes of methyl isocyanate, a gas used to produce some pesticides. The leak killed an estimated 15,000-20,000 people, and left several thousand more with permanent disabilities. The plant was understaffed, and had substandard operating and safety procedures. None of the six safety systems that could have prevented the accident was operational.

The Bhopal tragedy remains the world’s worst industrial disaster. But it is just a small part of an enormous tableau of needless suffering. The World Health Organization estimates that there are three million cases of pesticide poisoning worldwide each year, leading to up to 250,000 deaths.

In 1996, for example, insecticide-treated brown beans, purportedly stored for planting, found their way into the market in Nigeria, a “leak” connected with the deaths of a number of people in the south-west region of the country. In 2013, in India, an organophosphate pesticide killed 23 children, who ate a lunch of tainted rice, potatoes and soy.

These sorts of tragedies happen even when guidelines for pesticide registration and use are in place. In Nigeria, the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control banned 30 agrochemicals (pesticides and fertilizers) in 2008, after a number of deaths and poisonings. But it was inadequate to prevent the deaths from pesticide poisoning of 18 people in Nigeria’s Ondo state in 2015.

And the danger of inadequate regulation is not limited to acute disasters. The accumulation of toxic substances from chemicals applied both in the field and in storage also contributes to the continuous decline in the quality of our natural environment—namely, our soil, water and air.

More than 250 studies have linked agrochemicals to several types of cancers, including cancers of the brain, breast, colon, liver, lungs, prostate and thyroid. Children, in particular, seem to be susceptible to the toxic effects of pesticides: research shows that the increased incidence of childhood leukaemia and brain cancer could be the result of early exposure. And exposure to such chemicals has been linked to a variety of birth defects.

All of this paints a grim picture of what could happen in the US if the EPA’s opponents—who now include the agency’s director—get their way. In 2006 and 2007, the US used more than five billion pounds of pesticides annually—and that was with EPA regulations in place.

Of course, the US is not the only country at risk from excessive use of organophosphates. While pesticide use in developing countries is much lower than in the US, data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) show a steady increase in countries in Africa and Asia. Farmers in these regions are looking for easy ways to reduce crop losses and increase their income. And there are few regulations in place to stop them.

In fact, FAO reports that most pesticide-poisoning cases occur in developing countries, precisely because health standards there tend to be inadequate or non-existent. The UN report found that only 35% of developing countries had regulatory guidance on pesticide use, and all of them struggle with enforcement.

Developing countries must implement more effective mechanisms for monitoring the agrochemicals that are in circulation. They must also work to reduce the use of toxic chemicals to control pests and increase yields, especially by promoting organic alternatives that do not pose widespread health and environmental risks.

For example, organic manure can help boost crop yields, as can bio-pesticides, derived from plants. Such natural methods, which are both effective and non-toxic, should be adopted not just in developing countries, but around the world.

Synthetic pesticides may have a place in helping to feed an increasingly hungry world, especially in developing countries. But we must imagine how many unnecessary poisonings and deaths will occur unless they are deployed with the utmost care and restraint. If Americans can’t imagine that, Pruitt’s dream, if not reconsidered, will become their nightmare.

Revisiting the 1946 Royal Indian Navy mutiny

The Royal Indian Navy mutiny was arguably the single most important event in convincing the British government that it could no longer hold on to India

Acouple of weeks ago, I was privileged to see a remarkable work of art and history at Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya. Meanings Of Failed Action: Insurrection 1946 is the product of an unusual collaboration between artist Vivan Sundaram and cultural theorist Ashish Rajadhyaksha, aimed at kindling our collective memory of the Royal Indian Navy’s uprising in 1946. At the centre of the exhibition is a 40ft-long installation made of steel and aluminium and shaped like the hull of a ship. Visitors are seated inside and offered an extraordinary sound show drawing on the testimony of contemporaries, snatches of music and poetry, speeches of well-known and obscure figures.

It is a subtly layered discursive space in which to reflect upon the swirl of events in those fateful days of February 1946. The exhibition also has a wealth of documentary sources for the visitors to read: clippings from newspapers, police records, the telegrams exchanged between Britain, Delhi and Bombay. The cumulative effect is to force us to ask: How could such a momentous event have left so few traces in public memory? After all, the Royal Indian Navy (RIN) mutiny was arguably the single most important event in convincing the British government that it could no longer hold on to India.

The RIN revolt started on 18 February 1946 in Bombay. The naval ratings on HMIS Talwar protested against the poor quality of food and racial discrimination by British officers. The protest spread rapidly to the Castle and Fort barracks on shore, and to 22 ships in Bombay harbour. By the following evening, a naval central strike committee had been elected. The mutineers took out a procession in Bombay, holding aloft a portrait of Subhas Bose. Their ships also raised the flags of the Congress, Muslim League and Communist Party.

The demands advanced by the naval central strike committee combined service grievances with wider national concerns. The latter included the release of INA (Indian National Army) personnel and other political prisoners; withdrawal of Indian troops from Indonesia; and the acceptance of Indian officers only as superiors. Ratings in striking naval establishments outside Bombay echoed these themes. The strike spread to other naval establishments around the country. At its height, 78 ships, 20 shore establishments, and 20,000 ratings were involved in the uprising. The revolt at various locations was coordinated by signal communication equipment on board HMIS Talwar.

The most significant feature of this short uprising was the massive outpouring of public support for the mutineers. The city of Bombay, especially the labouring classes, went on strike on 22 February in solidarity. The public transport network was brought to a halt, trains were burnt, roadblocks were erected and commercial establishments were shut down. An army battalion was inducted to control the situation. Three days later Bombay was quiet, but 228 civilians had died and 1,046 were injured. Meanwhile, following assurances of sympathetic treatment from Vallabhbhai Patel and M.A. Jinnah, the ratings in Bombay surrendered on 23 February.

The leaders realized that any mass uprising would inevitably carry the risk of not being amenable to centralized direction and control. Besides, now that independence and power were in sight, they were eager not to encourage indiscipline in the armed forces.

The Congress’ stance was criticized at the time by the Communist Party and later by radical historians who argued that in 1946 India stood at the edge of a massive popular uprising—one that could have secured us real independence instead of a mere “transfer of power”. These arguments can be overstated, but the fact remains that the RIN revolt convinced the British that the sword arm of the Raj could no longer be relied upon to protect it. That these events have little purchase on our historical imagination is testimony to the continuing grip of nationalist historiography in our understanding of the 1940s.

In revisiting these events, though, we also need to situate them in a wider, global context. For the RIN revolt reverberated well beyond the subcontinent. On 19 February, the ratings tore down and burnt the American flag at the US Information Service office in Bombay. American intelligence described the revolt as “characterized by unexampled savagery” and as an “orgy of bloodshed and destruction”. Against the backdrop of the emerging Cold War—George Kennan had recently sent his famous long telegram from Moscow advocating containment of the Soviet Union—the Americans were particularly concerned about the role of the Communists in orchestrating the revolt.

US secretary of state Dean Acheson asked for more reports from India regarding “all events in which communist policy can be identified”. Desk-level officials in the state department argued that the Communists were the “world’s greatest specialists” in stoking naval mutinies. Their fingerprints were all over the RIN mutiny too, but “naturally the Indian Communist Party is not going to boast of having started such a mutiny”. Although reports from India contradicted such gloomy analysis, Washington continued to perceive these events through anti-communism lenses.

I hope this fine exhibition travels to other Indian cities as well as abroad. Karachi, another major centre of the RIN revolt, would be a natural destination. There it would also serve as a useful reminder to all of us that the military history of the subcontinent did not begin in August 1947.

The ‘Asian century’ might never come

Most institutions that support domestic economies are largely lacking in developing Asian lands

People in the West have long had a fascination with the East, with many predicting an “Asian century” marked by economic and market dominance. I have disagreed with the consensus on China and other Asian Tigers, and others are beginning to agree. Many problems stand in the way of the “Asian century”.

Japan dazzled Westerners with the speed of its recovery from the ashes of World War II. Japanese purchases of US trophy properties such as the Pebble Beach golf resort in California and Rockefeller Center in Manhattan in the 1980s, on top of leaping property and equity prices in Japan, convinced many that Japan would soon take over the world.

Japan’s economic decline in the early 1990s did not curb the fascination with Asia. It simply shifted to the Asian Tigers. The original four, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan, were later augmented by the likes of Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and, of course, China and, more recently, Pakistan, Vietnam, Indonesia and Bangladesh.

The late-1990s Asian financial crisis only temporarily disrupted Western fascination with the East. The 2007-09 Great Recession ended rapid economic growth in Western countries and the robust demand for exports that were the mainstay of developing economies. Still, many believed emerging countries could independently continue to grow rapidly and, indeed, support economic activity in the sluggish US and Europe.

Chinese real economic annual growth rates nosedived from double digits to a recessionary 6.3% during the worldwide downturn, but then revived due to the 2009 stimulus programme. Easy credit fuelled a property boom and inflation, and excessive infrastructure spending replaced exports as the growth engine. Many thought Chinese growth was self-sustaining and unrelated to sluggish economic performance in North America and Europe.

There are five main reasons why it won’t get any easier for Asia:

1. Globalization is largely complete. There isn’t much manufacturing in North America and Europe left to be moved to lower-cost developing economies. At the same time, the West is saturated with Asian exports, and those countries are competing among themselves for limited total export demand. Also, exports are shifting among those countries as low-end production moves from China to Pakistan and Bangladesh, much as they shifted out of Japan earlier. As economies grow, a greater share of spending is on services and less on goods. This reality is a long-term drag on almost all the other Asian lands, except India, due to their goods-export orientation.

2. The shift from being export-led economies to ones driven by domestic spending, especially by consumers, has been slow. Chinese leaders want this transition, but it is moving at glacial speed. At 37%, Chinese consumer spending as a share of GDP is well below major developed countries such as the US at 68.1%, Japan at 58.6%, and even Russia at 51.9%.

3. Almost all developing Asian economies are tightly controlled by governments. Top-down regimes stoutly resist reform and often persist until they’re overthrown by revolutions. The current Mao dynasty in China, as I’ve dubbed it, seems worried about popular unrest due to the lack of promised economic growth and is reducing what little political liberty was allowed.

President Xi Jinping is the Big Brother with lots of little brothers insuring proper thoughts and actions. In Malaysia, Prime Minister Najib Razak is enmeshed in a multibillion-dollar investment scandal. In the Philippines, crime and drug trafficking are so rampant that President Rodrigo Duterte was elected on a platform of eliminating drug dealers, even by murderous vigilante squads. South Korea’s former president Park Geun-hye was thrown out over corruption.

4. Population problems endure. Despite the need for new workers in Japan, women are discouraged from entering the labour force, and Japan continues to be unwelcoming towards newcomers. There’s no immigration visa despite the fact that 83% of Japanese hiring managers have difficulty filling jobs. China also has a looming labour shortage and severe limits to economic growth due to its earlier one-child policy. Low fertility rates are also destined to reduce the populations of Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea. At the other end of the spectrum are Asian countries like Indonesia and India, whose population is expected to exceed China’s by 2022.

5. Military threats are growing in Asia, and could severely disrupt stability and retard economic growth if they flare up. China is exercising its military muscles by challenging US military influence in the region by building military islands on reefs in the South China Sea. Japan is abandoning its post-World War pacifism and shifting from defensive to offensive capabilities. The Russians are also making military threats. The region contains five nuclear-armed countries: China, India and its rival Pakistan, Russia, and—most troubling—North Korea.

There may well be an “Asian century” in the future, but don’t hold your breath. It took about a millennium for the West to develop meaningful democracy, the rule of law, large middle classes that support domestic economies and all the institutions that are largely lacking in developing Asian lands

Challenges to protect Forests in India

Challenges to protect Forests in India

 India is one of the mega diversity countries in the world with different types of forests. Officially 20 per cent of geographical area in the country is under forest cover. The National Forest Policy (1988) aims to increase the forest cover to one third.

 According to India State Forest Report released in 2015, the forest cover has increased by 5081 square kilometres between 2013 - 2015, increasing the carbon sinks by 103 million tonnes.

Though Mizoram has the highest 93 per cent forest cover, many north eastern states have experienced decline in green cover. The country faces numerous challenges in implementing its policies to protect and grow forests.

 Protection of forests is done through implementation of Forest Conservation Act (1980) and through establishment of protected areas. The Government of India has established 597 Protected Areas of which 95 are National Parks and 500 Wild Life Sanctuaries. These comprise about 5 per cent of the geographical areas of the country. Different type of forests and scrub jungles are host to the diverse wild life including the tigers, elephants and lions.

Due to the rising population there is enormous pressure on forest land for extraction of forest based industries and encroachment for extension of agriculture. The rising conflicts between conserving forests for generating ecosystem services and diversion for developmental project poses one of the biggest challenges in managing the forest resources.

It is estimated that the demand for timber is growing at a faster speed from 58 million cubic meters in 2005 to 153 million cubic meters in 2020. The annual growth of the forest stock can only supply 70 million cubic meters of timber, forcing us to import hard wood timber from other countries.

 In India 67 per cent of the rural household depend on firewood for cooking. About one million deaths are reported annually caused by the fumes of firewood for cooking.  In order to address this problem, Pradhan Mantri LPG Scheme ‘Ujjwala Yojana’ is implemented by Ministry of Petrolium and Gas that provides free LPG connections to BPL families in remote rural areas. This has provided access to clean and efficient energy to a large number of families in the countryside.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has given the call to celebrate world forestry day for 2017 with the theme of ‘forests and energy’.  The emphasis is to develop wood as a major source of renewable energy, to mitigate climate change and fostering sustainable development. By developing community wood lots and delivering clean and energy efficient wood stoves, millions of people in developing economies will have access to cheap and reliable supply of renewable energy.

Green India Mission

The Climate Change Action Plan and the Green India mission attempts to address the issue of development of wood energy by establishing large scale tree plantations with the help of community participation.

According to Shri Anil Madhav Dave, MOS (I/C), M/o Environment, Forest and Climate Change “there are two major afforestation schemes, National Afforestation Programme (NAP) and National Mission for Green India (GIM). Both these schemes are implemented in participatory mode under joint forest management programme”.  NAP aims at eco regeneration of degraded forests and GIM aims at increasing the forest cover along with improving the quality of the forests, including the farm and agro forestry.

Under GIM, six million hectares of plantations will be established every year on degraded forest land.

One of the main pillars of afforestation is to regrow the forests in lieu of diversion of the forest land for developmental purposes. Both the houses of Parliament passed the Compensatory Afforesttion Bill in 2016. With a provision of Rs 42000 crores, and annual outlay of  Rs 6000 crores will be made available to states to facilitate conservation, improvement and expansion of forest resources in the country. This Act provides institutional framework at both central and state levels to implement the compensatory afforestation programme.

Additionally this will generate 15 crore man days of direct employment in the remote forest areas of the country helping tribal population. 

While implementing these green schemes, India faces enormous challenges. The climate change directly impacts the survival of planted saplings. The extension of dry areas and desertification is another big challenge that needs to be tackled with proper interventions.  There is need for participatory models of afforestation in which the local knowledge helps to regenerate and manage the forest resources.

Realising the strength of the tribal knowledge systems, the Prime Minister said” if there is someone who saved the forests, it is our tribal communities, and for them saving forests is part of the tribal culture”. He called upon the people to take the pledge to collectively work to conserve forests and increase the tree cover. More forests mean more water that benefits farmers and future generations.

In ancient Indian tradition the Rishis, or those who are the learned and sages get energy form the forests.  According to Rabindranath Tagore, life in forest is the highest form of cultural evolution.  The sages derived intellectual and spiritual energy from the forests, living near trees and water streams.

Though the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation has laid out ‘wood energy form the forests’ as the main theme of International Forest Day,  Indian tradition assigns much higher status and  value to the living energy of the forests to attain spiritual and cultural regeneration of life. This seems to be more holistic in understanding the links between forests and energy.