India’s Emerging Ecological Public and the Western Ghats …
429
7 Conclusions
Contemporary democracies are often criticised for failing to address adequately the
environmental concerns. This is much more evident when it comes to the Indian
democracy where the dissenting voices are polarised and the spaces available for
the public to interact freely are shrinking. Promoting the collective capabilities of
citizens by enabling and institutionalising the democratic deliberations will improve
the widening of the space of the ecological public. Such capabilities would go a long
way to promote sustainable development as that would promote adequate spaces
in enabling public policy debate freely and peacefully. In fact, The Gadgil Report
breaks new ground as far as the new public policy initiative with regard to ecology
is concerned. It takes cognizance of the earlier ecological initiative as well as rising
global sensitivity towards ecology. It demonstrates the significance of the right kind
of state initiative with regard to ecological questions. It also suggests a deliberative
platform for contiguous states as to how this initiative can deepen and broaden the
ecological public. It begets new modes of democratic dissent and opposition, seeking
state accountability on environmental issues. The state is often compulsively caught
in the ambivalence of negotiating the interest of different stakeholders and pressure
groups. This is much more conspicuous in the case of the contiguous states of the
Western Ghats. Hence democratic dissent can be a big challenge to the state as well
as an opportunity.
The protest to the report brings in the nature of politically motivated groups in
appropriating the common natural heritage for gain. The struggle to achieve a balance between conservation and development in the Western Ghats demonstrates the
contentions in which the democratic dispensation in India, with its competitive parties, is caught in. Political will generally favour development where large monies are
involved over the voices of the indigenous population who have the will and capacity
for sustainable management and conservation capabilities. The big capital harnesses
the vote bank politics and appropriates the agenda of development against ecological sensitivity. The failure of the Indian state to effectively combat the pressure
of vested interests shows the limitation of a postcolonial democracy to effectively
rally in favour of ecological concerns. The Gadgil report’s advocacy to accommodate and negotiate the space for the rightful dissent of the marginalised is what is
needed to garner support for sustainable development in the Western Ghats. The policy perspectives that the Gadgil report recommended, with its quest for sustainable
development, is what is needed to be emulated for ecological sustenance.
Acknowledgements I gratefully acknowledge the support and suggestions rendered by Professor
Valerian Rodrigiues, Former Professor of Political Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New
Delhi.
429
7 Conclusions
Contemporary democracies are often criticised for failing to address adequately the
environmental concerns. This is much more evident when it comes to the Indian
democracy where the dissenting voices are polarised and the spaces available for
the public to interact freely are shrinking. Promoting the collective capabilities of
citizens by enabling and institutionalising the democratic deliberations will improve
the widening of the space of the ecological public. Such capabilities would go a long
way to promote sustainable development as that would promote adequate spaces
in enabling public policy debate freely and peacefully. In fact, The Gadgil Report
breaks new ground as far as the new public policy initiative with regard to ecology
is concerned. It takes cognizance of the earlier ecological initiative as well as rising
global sensitivity towards ecology. It demonstrates the significance of the right kind
of state initiative with regard to ecological questions. It also suggests a deliberative
platform for contiguous states as to how this initiative can deepen and broaden the
ecological public. It begets new modes of democratic dissent and opposition, seeking
state accountability on environmental issues. The state is often compulsively caught
in the ambivalence of negotiating the interest of different stakeholders and pressure
groups. This is much more conspicuous in the case of the contiguous states of the
Western Ghats. Hence democratic dissent can be a big challenge to the state as well
as an opportunity.
The protest to the report brings in the nature of politically motivated groups in
appropriating the common natural heritage for gain. The struggle to achieve a balance between conservation and development in the Western Ghats demonstrates the
contentions in which the democratic dispensation in India, with its competitive parties, is caught in. Political will generally favour development where large monies are
involved over the voices of the indigenous population who have the will and capacity
for sustainable management and conservation capabilities. The big capital harnesses
the vote bank politics and appropriates the agenda of development against ecological sensitivity. The failure of the Indian state to effectively combat the pressure
of vested interests shows the limitation of a postcolonial democracy to effectively
rally in favour of ecological concerns. The Gadgil report’s advocacy to accommodate and negotiate the space for the rightful dissent of the marginalised is what is
needed to garner support for sustainable development in the Western Ghats. The policy perspectives that the Gadgil report recommended, with its quest for sustainable
development, is what is needed to be emulated for ecological sustenance.
Acknowledgements I gratefully acknowledge the support and suggestions rendered by Professor
Valerian Rodrigiues, Former Professor of Political Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New
Delhi.