downtoearth-subscribe

Search Results

  • Turning to God

    Turning to God

    Godfrey Baseley, the man behind "The Archers", BBC's popular serial on agricultural information, is dead. His 'gossip' was valuable advice to the country's farmers

  • UP farmers continue protest over land acquisition by Reliance

    UP farmers continue protest over land acquisition by Reliance

    Following farmers' protests against their displacement for land acquired for special economic zones (sezs), the central government on January 22, 2007, held up approvals for fresh sezs. So far, the

  • Biotech engineered rice has few takers

    Biotech engineered rice has few takers

    Despite advancements, research programmes in rice biotechnology heve drawn lukewarm response because it is felt that there is little money to be made from the new varities.

  • The crossover

    The crossover

    Fuel cells are more important to a developing country like India than developed countries. But the corporate sector is slow.

  • Hold tight

    Hold tight

    Behold: eco development is here, again

  • Mundra SEZ spells displacement for fisherfolk

    Mundra SEZ spells displacement for fisherfolk

    Livelihoods of fisherfolk is at stake as the Mundra special economic zone (sez) on the northern shore of the Gulf of Kutch gets underway. Potentially the largest sez in the country, it covers 28 km

  • Dirty detergents

    Dirty detergents

    Detergents are rated for how ecofriendly they are

  • Facing the flood

    Facing the flood

    How prepared is Bihar?

  • International pressure and the civil society

    Linking trade and environment benefits industrialised countries in every way. And they will promote their civil society to create a bigger and bigger fuss about it

  • The Marlboro people

    Indian companies are learning how to fight the civil society from their Western counterparts

  • Science is a political orphan

    This country does not need a Crisis Management Group. It needs a Governance Crisis Management Group

  • Hammer of Thor

    The most retrograde position, believe it or not, has been that of the ministry of environment and forests

  • Development is not a road

    Reportedly, bjp senior leader Arun Jaitley has contemptuously labelled Digvijay Singh s Madhya Pradesh government as ngo style . Why? Because it spends more on social deve lopment education

  • For frugality and sensible use

    A recent letter from a reader has disturbed me enormously. B P Radhakrishna, president of the Geological Society of India, in response to a story in Down To Earth about how drought was affecting

  • Shanghai-ed

    Finance minister P Chidambaram goes to Mumbai to deliberate, with its corporati, upon urban renewal, and promises sparkling growth for this bursting metropolis. On the way to the venue, he is

  • The poor? They are the government's problem

    Everybody knows one hand of the government does not know what the other is up to. But it does make a difference when a proposed programme of the government contradicts and, perhaps, even fatally

  • Goa's mining problems

    We were standing between a massive mine and a stunning water reservoir. Local activists were explaining to me that this iron ore mine was located in the catchment of the Salaulim water reservoir, the

  • Efficiency versus democracy

    Industrialist Ratan Tata has reportedly written to the prime minister cribbing about delays in implementing big buck projects. In his capacity as the chair of the government s investment commission

  • The political economy of Budget

    Support for further economic reforms in the context of India's globalisation will be mustered more easily if the deprived sections are assured of some safety net, says M K Venu FINANCE minister P Chidambaram's fifth budget stumped the chattering classes, mostly with incomes of well over Rs 10 lakh a year. The Rs 10-lakh income threshold is relevant because there are less than 300,000 people in India showing a taxable income of Rs 10 lakh and above. But they exercise disproportionate influence on policy. There are many more in the above income category, who do not pay taxes and probably have even greater influence on public policy! The budget also stumped economists, who are also part of the chattering classes. Initially they did not know what to make of a budget that seemed to give everything to everybody. The budget certainly did not lend itself to instant analysis on television channels where many economic pundits were sitting. In the first flush, one economist simply said he was overwhelmed, and didn't know how the numbers would work after so much goodies were handed out by the finance minister. "I am overwhelmed', is what he kept saying. The impatient TV anchor, obviously looking for a one liner, kept pressing, 'Is it good or bad?'. The only reply was,' I am overwhelmed.' It didn't take long for everyone to realise that it is not necessary for numbers to strictly add up in politics. In certain situations, sentiment and psychology can subsume numbers that don't add up. Which is why politics is often described as the art of the possible. While economics parades as an exact science, there are times when economists get lost in their linear frameworks and miss the wood for the trees. Further, what really stunned the chattering classes was someone like Dr Manmohan Singh or P Chidambaram could come up with such a massive loan waiver package. They associated such acts with politicians like the late Devi Lal, Charan Singh or among contemporaries, Prakash Singh Badal and M Karunanidhi. How could Manmohan Singh and Chidambaram do this, was the main question on their lips. However, at the end of the day the budget seemed to have got overwhelming support, if one went by how the vernacular press treated the finance minister's announcements. Politically, it is one of the sharpest statements one has come across in the past decade and a half. Chidambaram's dream budget in 1997 too had a mesmeric impact on the people but this one covers a much wider terrain in its inclusiveness, whatever critics may carp about. It took a while for the immensity of the political statement to sink into the BJP leaders. Initially some leaders tried to attack the Rs 60,000 loan waiver as irresponsible. Later, possibly after deeper consultations within the BJP leadership, it was decided to tone down the attack. The politics of it was visible even in Parliament when Chidambaram said only kulak landlords will oppose loan waivers for small farmers holding up to two hectares of land. The invocation of kulak landlords has an interesting dimension. Politically, it is significant that the Congress is attempting to wean the poorest among the backward caste, scheduled castes and minorities away from regional parties that have established themselves over the years. This would easily rank as among the most audacious attempts by the Congress to upset the present political arithmetic of various strong regional parties. If viewed in this perspective, it becomes easy to understand why considerations such as fiscal profligacy and misplaced budget assumptions do not stand a chance. In any case, of late, a feeling had developed in non-urban India that the country was reaping the riches of globalisation, in terms of mounting forex reserves, high corporate profits, and government revenues doubling in three years. IN SUCH a situation it becomes difficult to convince the other India that fiscal belt tightening is the way to go. Besides, this would be most hypocritical as even anecdotal evidence would suggest that the bulk of the growing government subsidies today are consumed by the urban middle class. Just take the Rs 71,000-crore energy subsidy. Over 80% of it must be going to the urban middle class. The finance minister has also been careful in not going overboard while opening the purse strings. He has kept enough head-room in his fiscal deficit target to ensure that some discipline remains. For instance, he has budgeted fiscal deficit at 2.5% of GDP, when he could have kept a target of 3% as per the FRBM timeline. He can technically spend extra about 0.5% of GDP or Rs 20,000 crore, without violating the FRBM Act. In fact, the expenditure on loan waiver in the first year could be no more than Rs 20,000 crore. Operationally, the waiver of Rs 60,000 crore will occur over three years. More interestingly, much of the write-offs will happen among loans which are already sitting as non-performing assets (NPAs) in banks. So the bank books will get cleaned up to that extent. In lieu of the write-offs, the banks could receive government bonds which they could liquidate in the market or sell to the Reserve Bank of India. True, this may constitute another offbalance sheet borrowing by the government. Even after taking some of the off-balance sheet items, heavens won't fall if the fiscal deficit moves up to 4% of GDP. What is the great sanctity to the 3% figure, one fails to understand. Both oil and food subsidies today are being enjoyed across the board by urban and rural India, and these subsidies have helped to keep food prices under control. It is difficult to imagine the political class surviving if the price of wheat in India were to track international trend. Global wheat prices have doubled in the past year. The price of other mass consumption items such as edible oil too has been maintained at lower than international price. Bad economics, but good for collective survival. So current circumstances in the global economy are exceptional and the budget has done well to admit that there are off-balance sheet subsidies whose value is growing by the day on account of rising global prices. Finally, support for further economic reforms in the context of India's globalisation will be mustered more easily if the deprived sections are assured of some safety net. The benefit of all this will eventually accrue to the growing aspirational middle class. This perspective must not be lost sight of. After all, it is in the interest of the emerging bourgeoisie to keep the present system alive and ticking.

  • Sharks being killed: Cosmetic industry gains (Editorial)

    Environmental management does not mean changing your light bulbs to use less energy. It means looking at everything you use to see what is beingdestroyed. Have you ever looked at the ingredients in your make up or lotions? Does your moisturizer or lipstick carry the word squalene in the ingredient list? If your answer is yes, then you are partly responsible for destroying the oceans. Squalene is oil derived from the liver of deep-sea sharks. 270,000 sharks are killed every day just for their fins and oil. The oil from their livers goes to the cosmetic industry and the fins go for soup. This enormous and mindless genocide has made 307 species of sharks endangered. In fact, the total number of sharks left in the ocean is ten percent of what they were in 1950. Deep-sea sharks (those living in ocean depths of 300 to 1500 metres) have especially large reserves of squalene since their livers comprise one-third of the weight of the entire animal. So, most deep-sea sharks are caught only for their oil. The excessive catching of these sharks has caused the dramatic population declines of certain species. Some repeatedly targeted shark species are the Aizame shark (dog fish) Leafscale Gulper Shark, and the Gulper, Kitefin and Portuguese dogfish which live between 1300 to 1500 m below sea level. Deep sea sharks grow very slowly, mature late in life and have only a few young in their entire lives. They take long breaks between reproductive cycles, rendering them extremely vulnerable to over-fishing. These sharks are a target species in many industrial fisheries and are frequently caught by fishermen targeting other species. As a result deep sea sharks are at extreme risk and their numbers will take long to recover. The ocean is a very fragile ecosystem. Sharks are apex predators and oceanic food chains are dependent on them. The ocean will implode without predators and our dependence on ocean creatures will impact us tremendously as well. It is immoral to let entire species disappear for the dubious benefits of personal skin specially when there is a renewable alternative in olives. The cosmetic industry has a duty to educate consumers about what they are putting on their faces. Squalene is an oil used in cosmetic products ranging from anti aging creams to lip-gloss to give them a smooth finish and make your skin glisten. It is found in all animals, humans and some plants. It is the sebum oil that your body produces at the root of its hair. In fact it is the same composition as ear wax so it would be cheaper to use that rather than killing such an important species and rubbing its liver oil into your skin. The point is, it is unnecessary. It is not a vitamin or a mineral, it is just oil. Shark-based squalene has a readily available substitute in the market that comes from a purely vegetable origin. Squalene can be obtained from olives and it is of better quality than animal-based squalene and is less expensive as well. Squalene is also found in amaranth seeds, rice bran, wheat germ, fungi and date palm. Vegetable derived squalane is cheaper to produce, more stable against oxidation, of a higher food grade and more compatible with skin than that produced from shark-liver. Oceana is the world's largest international ocean environmental group and is campaigning to end the use of squalene in cosmetic products. As a result some companies have promised to stop using it from this year. Unilever has promised to replace shark derived squalene with plant oil in Ponds and Dove by April 2008 ( However they will still use it in other products). With this decision, Unilever has joined other European-based cosmetic companies that informed Oceana that they do not use this product from threatened animals and prefer sustainable plant-based sources. L'Oreal is also phasing-out products containing shark-based squalene. Other companies are Boots, Clarins, Sisley and La Mer (an Estie Lauder brand. Squalene 'Health Capsules' are another scam. Fly by night companies use the internet to advertise 'pure squalene oil' and 'squalene capsules' making claims about its anti-oxidant properties something consistently debunked by scientists. Among the nonsensical claims made, are those saying that sharks defend themselves therefore their liver oil will make the human body defend itself (I actually read this on an Australian selling site). Other claims are that squalene helps protect against substances that weaken or damage our natural defense systems. There is no clinical evidence to support this. It is is an oil which keeps skin soft - mustard, coconut, olive and all the other oils do. When the cosmetic industry talks about corporate social responsibility, they should start with using ingredients responsibly. Here is no point killing part of the earth and then giving a few dollars to feed children in Ethiopia or creating AIDS awareness. (To join the animal welfare movement contact gandhim@nic.in).