Bengaluru: On December 10, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) announced its Champions of the Earth awards for 2024. Six individuals across the world have been chosen for this award in different categories, and of them is one of India’s top ecologists, Madhav Gadgil.
Gadgil has received the award under the “Lifetime Achievement” category. The other awardees are Sonia Guajajara, Brazil’s Minister of Indigenous Peoples; Amy Bowers Cordalis, an indigenous rights advocate in the United States; Gabriel Paun, a Romanian environmental activist; SEKEM, a sustainable agriculture initiative in Egypt; and Lu Qi, a Chinese scientist and desertification expert.
Gadgil, founder of the Centre for Ecological Sciences at the Indian Institute of Science Bengaluru, has been studying India’s ecology and environment for more than 50 years now. His topics of study have been very diverse, ranging from the sacred groves of the Western Ghats to traditional ecological knowledge and peoples’ participation, India’s ecological issues and conflicts to environmental movements, and more.
Also read: Wayanad Mishap Fallout: Gadgil Report, Deforestation and Nicobar Project Figure in Parliament
One of his most widely-known and quoted works is his report submitted to the government as head of the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) in 2011. The report graded areas outside Protected Areas in the Western Ghats into three zones of eco-sensitivity based on the ecologically fragile nature of the mountain range and made several recommendations. However, these have not been implemented in any form yet, across any of the six states home to the Western Ghats in India.
Gadgil has also authored and co-authored several books, from This Fissured Land in 1992, to his latest, in 2023, A Walk Up The Hill – Living with People and Nature. He is also the recipient of several awards including the top civilian awards in the country – the Padma Shri, in 1981, and the Padma Bhushan, in 2006.
The Wire caught up with the 82-year-old Gadgil on the occasion of his UNEP Champions of the Earth Award 2024.
Accolades are not new to you Dr Gadgil, and the most recent feather in your cap is the 2024 Champions of the Earth Award that the UNEP has just released today. You’ve been conferred the award in the “Lifetime Achievement” category. What are your thoughts on receiving this award?
I am happy, certainly. As a scientist I have been trying to do my best over the years. And maybe a little different from most other scientists – I am not only interested in what is happening in the scientific world. Certainly I am very committed to good scientific research which I continue till today, but I am very much interested in what is happening on the ground. The charms of India for me is its democracy, its diversity of nature, culture and people and the opportunity for those who can avail of it, to be anywhere in the country and be with the people. And this is what I have been doing. And I have also tried to, all along, be honest and outspoken. There is an interesting edit by (A.F.) Whitehead, the great mathematician and philosopher, which says that science anchors itself to a solid bedrock of facts, however unpalatable they will be. And all along, I’ve said many things that are unpalatable to those in power but I have stood my ground by always making sure that I give good, solid evidence. And the evidence is based very much on the ground… even with the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel report, it has been my strong point I must say and I’m very happy that I managed to do all this.
You’ve worked extensively in the Western Ghats and the report that the team you led – the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel – filed, is one of your most widely-known and also the most debated-about. The panel submitted its report in 2011 after a lot of field visits, interactions with local communities and more. The report essentially divided the Western Ghats across six states into Eco Sensitive Zones of different gradations: 1 (areas of highest sensitivity), 2 (areas of high sensitivity) and 3 (areas of medium sensitivity). The report made a lot of recommendations, including no mining or quarrying in areas listed under ESZ1. All states rejected the report; many called it “impractical.” And 13 years later, it has not been implemented even after another panel headed by Krishnaswamy Kasturirangan submitted another, more diluted report that also decreased the area across the Ghats that is to be eco-sensitive.
Your 2011 report keeps coming to the limelight often. The latest was on July 30 when Wayanad in Kerala witnessed multiple landslides. The area where the landslides occurred, Meppadi, had been listed as one of the 18 ecologically sensitive localities. And after the incident, you’ve called the disaster “man-made” – you’ve argued that the developmental activities in the area, including quarrying and tourism, worsened the impacts. But we’re also seeing a lot of impacts due to climate change, and heavy and intense rainfall in a very short period of time is one of them. So do you still feel that this tragedy could have been averted if your report had been implemented?
I cannot say that it would have averted it totally, but certainly the chance of it occurring would have been very very substantially reduced if our recommendations had been accepted. You mentioned the short bursts of intense rains, and I’ve been interested in this phenomenon especially since 2021, when there were many large landslides in Maharashtra. Since I come from Maharashtra and I have very good contacts with developments in the countryside, (people) reported that there never have been such intense rainfall bouts before. So I became interested… I worked for many years at the Centre for Ecological Sciences in the Indian Institute of Science, which also has a centre for climate change. I have friends there and I checked with them. They pointed me to certain important publications. Interestingly, one from Israel and one from China have shown that increasing levels of aerosols in the atmosphere are related to the incidents of such intense rainfall events. Where there are very high levels of these aerosols, then raindrops coalesce on the nuclei of dust and so on in the atmosphere, quickly grow to a large size and what would have been a drizzle across four or five hours is now converted to an intense bout of rainfall in 30-40 minutes. And that intensity makes a difference because the flooding and the possibility of bursting of barrages, all that increases with this intensity. So climate change is related to aerosol levels.
And what are these aerosol levels related to? Major sources are from rock quarries – the fine dust that is produced in the production of so-called “man-made sand.” This increases pollution in the surrounding areas and also increases the amount of aerosols. India is the aerosol capital of the world. The other major contribution is the emissions from vehicles… again, we are continually building all these highways and roads and ways to make vehicles move faster and encouraging more and more vehicles. So those highways and roads are driving demand for rock quarries, which are producing aerosol particles and increased facilities are leading to more and more cars. All this means that climate change is being driven by many changes which we had said should be averted in many of these areas. It is not that it is independent of what we had talked about (in the WGEEP report).
You’re saying that infrastructure being built is now connected to climate change. So let’s zoom out of the Western Ghats and into other developmental projects happening across the country that will have impacts on local communities and ecosystems – the Great Nicobar Project is one of them. Facilities coming up on the southern part of this island include an international transshipment terminal and port, a greenfield airport, a power plant as well as a township. New estimates suggest that up to 1 crore rainforest trees could be cut for the projects. Indigenous wildlife is under threat, as are the Shompen and the Nicobarese, two particularly vulnerable tribal groups who live on the Island. How problematic is this project and can India do without it?
If India has to act as a law-abiding country, then the Forest Rights Act would very much apply to the Shompens and the Nicobarese. Those areas should remain inviolate. They should be community forest resources of particularly vulnerable tribal groups and they should not be touched. So we are violating these laws all the time. There is very well-documented, detailed evidence of this in the Niyamgiri hills in Odisha. A panel headed by N.C. Saxena, a respected bureaucrat, gives detailed evidence of how the forest department and revenue department officials were deliberately forging the gram sabha resolutions regarding what was happening. So this is the kind of situation which certainly should not be there in a law-abiding country. And we’re a democracy, we are supposed to be a law-abiding country and this should not be happening.
Even recently, Chhattisgarh tribal bodies have said that their consent – via their gram panchayat – was forged to secure clearance for mining in Hasdeo. There is huge inequity in the impacts of such projects – it’s often the most marginalised and vulnerable communities that bear the brunt. Whether it’s the coal mining by the Adani Group in Hasdeo in Chhattisgarh, or the Shompen and the Nicobarese in Great Nicobar. How do we build a system to address this? You’ve worked and spoken a lot about the importance of decentralisation and giving local communities more power in sustainable development and resource management. How do we implement this and do it well enough?
The only way forward is for people to get better informed, and organised, to press for their rights and press for the constitutional provisions and what are actually enacted as laws and protest… for example, the Pollution Control Board is producing false data all the time. Now, modern technology has made it possible for local community people to actually detect the levels of many pollutants… in the water for instance, so that they can themselves collect honest data and show what is happening. And show clearly how bogus the Pollution Control Board data is. This can now be done. There are sensors on mobiles, cameras… they won’t cost much if expenses are shared at the community level. Many such things must be done.
I’ve been working a lot with the community forest rights holders in Maharashtra. A large number of communities have been given such rights and also in other districts of the country. Using zoom meetings like this and so on, local community leaders who are not necessarily well-educated because education does not reach these communities, are nevertheless able to communicate, share their experiences and move forward. This is possible… while the inequities in wealth are increasing, the inequities in information availability are decreasing rapidly.
You have been vocal about scientists not speaking up enough for ecological and environmental issues. We do have some scientists speaking up now, but how important is this? And how feasible is it, especially at a time when criticising any policy or project is seen as being “anti-national?”
If you have the courage, you have the courage. If you have the courage you can say that you are being labelled anti-national by people who are equating national interest with those of the small coterie of vested interests, and challenge that. This is possible. But a very high number of scientists are unfortunately making income by producing bogus environmental impact assessment reports.
In Goa, there are very interesting circumstances… Aleixo Sequeira, who was the minister for environment in Goa, wanted this to be exposed. He made available to me a whole set of environmental reports which would otherwise not be readily available. I not only studied them, but I went to many villages which are impacted and stayed in the huts of the local people. Let me tell you very interesting experiences of how data is doctored.
There is a village in Goa, Visaogley. I was staying with Hanumant Thaparam… at five o’clock, we were rudely awakened by the mining trucks that were beginning to ply. He said there was a clear ban on not starting before 6 o’clock. If I hadn’t been staying with him, I would not have known that. Scientists will just make flying visits for a few hours and talk to them. But they will not get this kind of information.
He asked me if I would like to see how the air pollution levels are monitored. I said yes. The air pollution monitoring equipment was situated in his coconut orchard, some 400 meters away from the road, where the bulk of the air pollution from the traffic will be. So bogus data is being collected.
In Pune where I stay now, the worst air pollution levels are in what is called the Pune river city square. There are no air pollution monitoring units there. The unit is at the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, at a location where the air pollution is of course much much less. This is how things are being done. But if you (as a scientist) are willing to put in the effort, you can bring this to the light.
What is the biggest challenge you have faced over the last 60 odd years of being an ecologist in India, someone who has shaped policy and public opinion so much, and spearheading crucial reports such as the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel report?
One big challenge has been the unwillingness of the scientific elite to actually try and understand the interests of the common people of the country. And the ruling classes are wanting to make sure that as much as possible, people remain ignorant, and swallow all stories about development and progress without examining it.
When somebody like me produces this report (the WGEEP report), whatever it says is unpalatable to the powers that be. Nevertheless there is very clear substantial data provided for every statement. So you simply condemn it as “anti-development,” whatever that means to them. Then, regretfully, you get people like Kasturirangan – he is a good friend of mine, and I was very sorry for what he did – who in his report says, how can local communities have any say in economic decisions. If a rock quarry is sending down landslides and killing people in your village, that rock quarry is an economic decision and local communities will have no role to say anything about it. You can check the report. People call it “watered down.” To my mind, it is perverted. Because we are talking about a democratic approach. The Kasturirangan report is advocating a dictatorial, anti-people approach. And this is “impractical” business (referring to his report being called “impractical” by politicians). What is practical then… to flout all laws and trample democracy, is that practical?
Political will will respond to peoples’ pressure. Today, the political will is entirely responding to the money man’s pressures. Unless people can counter this, things won’t change.
