Enough of the Condescension

Editorial:-
A regular march of press releases pass through newspaper offices; a majority of these are about awareness programmes [on a plethora of issues and missions] and some from political groups [claiming to be speaking for the “poor and innocent” Sikkimese]. From NGO cells of hydel project developers claiming to have taught basti children the importance of washing their hands [yes, this was done], to obviously registered-for-specific-projects ‘service providers’ becoming enlightened saviours, there is no dearth of agents claiming to be delivering virtuous service. Recently, among the self-projected benefits of a sponsored project was the claim that it would bring “greater conservation awareness among the local communities.” Such comments are made often and rarely contested, but in the condescension with which they are thrown about lies the reason why policy interventions which appear grand on paper, end up delivering only very shallow results. The problem is not with the intent, in most cases, these are very earnest undertakings, but in the ignorance and superficiality with which they are executed.
The problem areas are always accurately identified, but it is in suggestions like the fore-mentioned claim to create “greater awareness among local communities” that the intent is misdirected because it suggests that the environment and biodiversity are being rescued from the stakeholders. Examples of such bureaucratic arrogance abound. Look at the manner in which organic farming is being promoted. A good idea in itself, the consultants, at their patronising best [in what we receive by way of press releases], hold up farmers adopting organic practises as “progressive farmers”, implying thereby that those who still prefer fertilisers and pesticides are somehow “regressive”. Who introduced the water-leaching carcinogens to farming in the first place? In Sikkim’s case, organic farming was the only practice for centuries until departments infiltrated the village farms singing praises of fertilisers and pesticides. They dismissed established-by-tradition and tested-by-time farming practises as old-fashioned and are now realising how short-sighted the approach was. Now that organic farming is being resuscitated, at least admit that a mistake was made in the past. Similarly, local communities everywhere have evolved very refined sustainable usage patterns for their ecological resources, until protection and ownership was usurped by the State. Nowhere in the world have “local communities” ravaged local environment or destabilized biodiversity; it has always been urban greed that has wiped out rural environment and lifestyle. It is ironic hence that urban consultants should return as do-gooders telling the bastiwallahs on how to mend their ways. Some realisation is however dawning that conservation is not possible without endorsement of the “local communities”, but even in such agencies as the JFMCs, the “officers” refuse to hand over any real power to the stakeholders. The attitudes that underline these interventions are flawed, not in what they seek to achieve or deliver, but because they neither trust nor recognise rural pragmatism. There are few “awareness programmes” more ironic than those on the importance of panchayati raj for Panchayat members themselves; they are already aware of it, these sessions should be for government officers who still appear confused about what “public servant” means, and how that is a rung lower than “public representative”.
This, even though it might not appear to be so, is not about babu-bashing, but a condemnation of the education system that creates such disconnected minds with executive power in their hands. What is required is not “greater conservation awareness”, because that is already in place, but more awareness about global realities which are intruding into rural spaces. The forest resources are not under threat from local communities, but are imperiled by the greed manifesting in places further away. Sikkim’s medicinal herbs are not being over-harvested by local stakeholders for kitchen-cures, but for the pharma-mafia. Stakeholders need awareness about these threats that have developed beyond their sights, they will devise their own checks and balances for them. Ditto for the Panchayats; tell them where they fit into the State-level scheme of things, and they will stand up to the roles. Say sorry to the farmers and tell them they can revert to organic farming and they will adapt well. Just recognise the traditional knowledge base and respect rural pragmatism and factor these into all planning and most of the glitches and superficiality that compromise development planning will be taken care of.