Environment and Human Security debates in the Himalayas
Discourse among the scholars with respect to the environmental concerns across the mountains and over all ecological balance and consequent impact on the well being of human goes back to 1970s. It was in the conference of Munich in December 1974 that Professor Jack Ives for the first time highlighted the problems that the world’s mountains faced over the years, in particular the Himalayas. The conference led to three major outcomes that paved the way for a more concrete discourse on the mountain issues in the years to come. The first was an alarmist report (Losing Ground, 1976) by the New York Times science editor, Eric Eckholm; the second outcome was establishment and publication of a journal ‘Mountain Research and Development in 1981 that still continues to serve as an important forum for physical and social scientists and the third outcome was the establishment of ‘International Center for Integrated Mountain Development’ (ICIMOD) in Kathmandu in 1982.
The Rio Summit, 1992, dedicated a chapter (13) on its Agenda 21 to discuss pertinent environmental problems characterising mountains with the consequent ecological and human implications. The chapter titled, ‘Managing Fragile Ecosystems: Sustainable Mountain Development’ states “Mountains are an important source of water, energy and biological diversity. Furthermore, they are a source of such key resources as minerals, forest products and agricultural products and of recreation. As a major ecosystem representing the complex and interrelated ecology of our planet, mountain environments are essential to the survival of the global ecosystem. Mountain ecosystems are, however, rapidly changing. They are susceptible to accelerated soil erosion, landslides and rapid loss of habitat and genetic diversity. On the human side, there is widespread poverty among mountain inhabitants and loss of indigenous knowledge. As a result, most global mountain areas are experiencing environmental degradation. Hence, the proper management of mountain resources and socio-economic development of the people deserves immediate action”. Two programme areas were included in the chapter to further elaborate the problem of fragile ecosystems with regard to all mountains of the world. These are:
a.Generating and strengthening knowledge about the ecology and sustainable development of mountain ecosystems;
b.Promoting integrated watershed development and alternative livelihood opportunities.
In 1996, the President of the Kyrgyz Republic at the international conference ‘Mountain Research – Challenges for the 21st Century’ for the first time spoke up his mind to propose ‘mountains’ as a theme for an international year. Two years later, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 53/24, in which it proclaimed 2002 as the International Year of Mountains. The resolution encouraged Governments, the United Nations system and all other actors to take advantage of the Year to increase awareness of the importance of sustainable mountain development. In the same resolution, the General Assembly invited FAO to serve as the lead agency for the Year, in collaboration with governments, UNEP, UNDP, UNESCO and other relevant organisations of the United Nations system and NGOs.
The year 2002 saw series of conferences, seminars, consultations and research studies at local, national, regional and global levels. As the culminating event of the International Year of Mountains, the Bishkek Global Mountain Summit was held towards the end of the 2002. The summit gave birth to The Bishkek Mountain Platform. The objective of the Platform is to continue with existing initiatives and to develop substantive efforts beyond the Year by mobilising resources, giving orientation and guidance, and promoting synergies. In particular, it will provide a framework for stakeholders and others to contribute to sustainable development in the world's mountain regions. It will enable them to act together at all levels from local to global to improve the livelihoods of mountain people, to protect mountain ecosystems and to use mountain resources more wisely. The Platform furthermore, serves as a contribution to debate in the General Assembly of the United Nations and to the achievement of the Millennium Goals.
The World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002 held at Stockholm did not dedicate any specific chapters for mountain development issues. It, nevertheless, clearly highlighted the need to reflect back on the pertinent environmental issues characterising the major resource zones of the world, including mountains, when it agreed that the protection of the environment and socio-economic development are fundamental to sustainable development that were brought out under the Rio Principles. The summit agreed on a series of commitments in five priority areas that were backed by specific government announcements on programmes and by partnership initiatives. In his speech at the conference, Mr. Kofi Annan said, “We have to go out and take action. This is not the end. It is the beginning”.
The UN General Assembly on its fifty- seventh session (January 2003) via agenda item 86 passed a resolution acknowledging the achievements of the International Year of Mountains 2002 and taking note of various mountain initiatives taken so far for the sustainable development of the mountain regions. It further designated 11 December as International Mountain Day.
In 2003 the Food and Agriculture Organisation submitted a report to the UN General Assembly. The Secretary General formally transmitted the report to the General Assembly on the fifty-eighth session of the assembly, on 11th July 2003. The report titled ‘International Year of Mountains, 2002’ describes achievements made at the national, regional and international levels throughout 2002, with a emphasis on activities that ensured that the International Year of Mountains, 2002, was more than a communications event but a catalyst for long term, concrete action for sustainable mountain development. It also highlights the challenges that lie beyond the year and provides suggestions for considerations by the General Assembly as to how countries might continue to promote and effectively implement sustainable development in mountain regions around the world.
Further, The Global Mountain Forum was established in year 1995 through international collaboration from non-government organisations, universities, governments, multilateral agencies, and the private sector. It promotes global action toward equitable and ecologically sustainable mountain development. This is sought through information sharing, mutual support and advocacy. In order to achieve these objectives the Mountain Forum uses modern and traditional communications, supports networking and capacity building and encourages members to be proactive in advocating sustainable development of mountain areas (www.mtnfourm.org).
The case of Himalayas
The Himalayas was one of the first systems to come into the discourse among the scholars in the context of global mountain environmental concerns. Professor Jack D. Ives was one of the pioneers to initiate the issue of Himalayan environmental issues and question of human well being in the Munich Conference of December 1974. Perceptions of environmental change affecting the Himalayan region have undergone extensive revision over the last thirty years (Ives, J.D., 2004, 17). The first part of the period characterising 1970s and major part of 1980s saw debates and discourse revolving around the thesis of environmental collapse across the Himalayas due to exponential increase in pressure on the natural resources triggered by rapid population growth and deepening poverty.
The alarmist report 'Losing Ground' by Erik Eckholm (1976) widely publicised the thesis. Further, the World Bank issued one of the most important postulations in this connection in 1979 (World Bank, 1979) when it predicted that by the year 2000 all accessible forest in Nepal (Himalaya) would be eliminated. Such Himalayan environmental paradigm of the 1970s and 1980s came to be widely known as the Theory of Himalayan Environmental Degradation. In brief, the Theory proposed that increased devastating flooding on the Ganges and Brahmaputra lowlands was a direct response to extensive deforestation in the Himalaya. The deforestation was presumed to result from a rapid growth in the mountain subsistence farming populations dependent on the forests fro fodder and fuel and for conversion to terraced agriculture. As steep mountain slopes were denuded of forest cover, it was assumed that the heavy monsoon rains caused accelerated soil erosion, numerous landslides, and increased runoff and sediment transfer onto the plains. This was further assumed to induce a progressive increase in flooding of Gangetic India and Bangladesh, putting at risk the lives of several hundred million people (Ives, J. D., 2004).
Although the linkage of human poverty and natural disaster continuous to attract serious debate such paradigm has been discredited by large numbers of research works in the subsequent years. Further with the passage of time the predicted disaster of the catastrophist theory has failed to materialise (Ives, 2004). It has, as a result, opened the way for a more realistic appraisal of the actual dynamics of change in the region. The International conference on the ‘Himalaya-Ganges Problem’ held at Mohonk Mountain House, New York in May 1986 served as an initial platform to debunk the theory of Himalayan environmental degradation. In fact, the very objective of the conference was to discuss, debate and investigate the prevailing Himalayan environmental paradigm of the 1970s and 1980s on the floor. The conference brought to light that the Theory lacked scientific substantiation. It, more importantly, paved the way to the publication of 'The Himalayan Dilemma: Reconciling Development and Conservation' under the authorship of two great scholars (Ives and Messerli, 1989) where the authors challenged the prevailing Himalayan environmental notion and asked for a more focused and rigorous empirical research in order to substantiate the many issues that had been raised.
Since 1989 a vast amount of related environmental research has been undertaken. They are scattered widely across the literature. However, majority of them support the findings of Ives and Messerli (e. g. Thompson, 1995, Forsyth, 1996, Hofer and Messerli, 2002, Ives, 2004). Today, it is accepted, at least among researchers, that the assumed agent-s of environmental threat in the Himalayas advocated by the Theory of Himalayan Environmental Degradation is far from truth. Rather, there are other pertinent forces including geomorphic, socio-economic, administrative, (geo) political, and ethnic/religious (including terrorism) that have played major role in directing the human security in the region over the years and have acted as dominant causes of instability in the region.
Discourse among the scholars with respect to the environmental concerns across the mountains and over all ecological balance and consequent impact on the well being of human goes back to 1970s. It was in the conference of Munich in December 1974 that Professor Jack Ives for the first time highlighted the problems that the world’s mountains faced over the years, in particular the Himalayas. The conference led to three major outcomes that paved the way for a more concrete discourse on the mountain issues in the years to come. The first was an alarmist report (Losing Ground, 1976) by the New York Times science editor, Eric Eckholm; the second outcome was establishment and publication of a journal ‘Mountain Research and Development in 1981 that still continues to serve as an important forum for physical and social scientists and the third outcome was the establishment of ‘International Center for Integrated Mountain Development’ (ICIMOD) in Kathmandu in 1982.
The Rio Summit, 1992, dedicated a chapter (13) on its Agenda 21 to discuss pertinent environmental problems characterising mountains with the consequent ecological and human implications. The chapter titled, ‘Managing Fragile Ecosystems: Sustainable Mountain Development’ states “Mountains are an important source of water, energy and biological diversity. Furthermore, they are a source of such key resources as minerals, forest products and agricultural products and of recreation. As a major ecosystem representing the complex and interrelated ecology of our planet, mountain environments are essential to the survival of the global ecosystem. Mountain ecosystems are, however, rapidly changing. They are susceptible to accelerated soil erosion, landslides and rapid loss of habitat and genetic diversity. On the human side, there is widespread poverty among mountain inhabitants and loss of indigenous knowledge. As a result, most global mountain areas are experiencing environmental degradation. Hence, the proper management of mountain resources and socio-economic development of the people deserves immediate action”. Two programme areas were included in the chapter to further elaborate the problem of fragile ecosystems with regard to all mountains of the world. These are:
a.Generating and strengthening knowledge about the ecology and sustainable development of mountain ecosystems;
b.Promoting integrated watershed development and alternative livelihood opportunities.
In 1996, the President of the Kyrgyz Republic at the international conference ‘Mountain Research – Challenges for the 21st Century’ for the first time spoke up his mind to propose ‘mountains’ as a theme for an international year. Two years later, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 53/24, in which it proclaimed 2002 as the International Year of Mountains. The resolution encouraged Governments, the United Nations system and all other actors to take advantage of the Year to increase awareness of the importance of sustainable mountain development. In the same resolution, the General Assembly invited FAO to serve as the lead agency for the Year, in collaboration with governments, UNEP, UNDP, UNESCO and other relevant organisations of the United Nations system and NGOs.
The year 2002 saw series of conferences, seminars, consultations and research studies at local, national, regional and global levels. As the culminating event of the International Year of Mountains, the Bishkek Global Mountain Summit was held towards the end of the 2002. The summit gave birth to The Bishkek Mountain Platform. The objective of the Platform is to continue with existing initiatives and to develop substantive efforts beyond the Year by mobilising resources, giving orientation and guidance, and promoting synergies. In particular, it will provide a framework for stakeholders and others to contribute to sustainable development in the world's mountain regions. It will enable them to act together at all levels from local to global to improve the livelihoods of mountain people, to protect mountain ecosystems and to use mountain resources more wisely. The Platform furthermore, serves as a contribution to debate in the General Assembly of the United Nations and to the achievement of the Millennium Goals.
The World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002 held at Stockholm did not dedicate any specific chapters for mountain development issues. It, nevertheless, clearly highlighted the need to reflect back on the pertinent environmental issues characterising the major resource zones of the world, including mountains, when it agreed that the protection of the environment and socio-economic development are fundamental to sustainable development that were brought out under the Rio Principles. The summit agreed on a series of commitments in five priority areas that were backed by specific government announcements on programmes and by partnership initiatives. In his speech at the conference, Mr. Kofi Annan said, “We have to go out and take action. This is not the end. It is the beginning”.
The UN General Assembly on its fifty- seventh session (January 2003) via agenda item 86 passed a resolution acknowledging the achievements of the International Year of Mountains 2002 and taking note of various mountain initiatives taken so far for the sustainable development of the mountain regions. It further designated 11 December as International Mountain Day.
In 2003 the Food and Agriculture Organisation submitted a report to the UN General Assembly. The Secretary General formally transmitted the report to the General Assembly on the fifty-eighth session of the assembly, on 11th July 2003. The report titled ‘International Year of Mountains, 2002’ describes achievements made at the national, regional and international levels throughout 2002, with a emphasis on activities that ensured that the International Year of Mountains, 2002, was more than a communications event but a catalyst for long term, concrete action for sustainable mountain development. It also highlights the challenges that lie beyond the year and provides suggestions for considerations by the General Assembly as to how countries might continue to promote and effectively implement sustainable development in mountain regions around the world.
Further, The Global Mountain Forum was established in year 1995 through international collaboration from non-government organisations, universities, governments, multilateral agencies, and the private sector. It promotes global action toward equitable and ecologically sustainable mountain development. This is sought through information sharing, mutual support and advocacy. In order to achieve these objectives the Mountain Forum uses modern and traditional communications, supports networking and capacity building and encourages members to be proactive in advocating sustainable development of mountain areas (www.mtnfourm.org).
The case of Himalayas
The Himalayas was one of the first systems to come into the discourse among the scholars in the context of global mountain environmental concerns. Professor Jack D. Ives was one of the pioneers to initiate the issue of Himalayan environmental issues and question of human well being in the Munich Conference of December 1974. Perceptions of environmental change affecting the Himalayan region have undergone extensive revision over the last thirty years (Ives, J.D., 2004, 17). The first part of the period characterising 1970s and major part of 1980s saw debates and discourse revolving around the thesis of environmental collapse across the Himalayas due to exponential increase in pressure on the natural resources triggered by rapid population growth and deepening poverty.
The alarmist report 'Losing Ground' by Erik Eckholm (1976) widely publicised the thesis. Further, the World Bank issued one of the most important postulations in this connection in 1979 (World Bank, 1979) when it predicted that by the year 2000 all accessible forest in Nepal (Himalaya) would be eliminated. Such Himalayan environmental paradigm of the 1970s and 1980s came to be widely known as the Theory of Himalayan Environmental Degradation. In brief, the Theory proposed that increased devastating flooding on the Ganges and Brahmaputra lowlands was a direct response to extensive deforestation in the Himalaya. The deforestation was presumed to result from a rapid growth in the mountain subsistence farming populations dependent on the forests fro fodder and fuel and for conversion to terraced agriculture. As steep mountain slopes were denuded of forest cover, it was assumed that the heavy monsoon rains caused accelerated soil erosion, numerous landslides, and increased runoff and sediment transfer onto the plains. This was further assumed to induce a progressive increase in flooding of Gangetic India and Bangladesh, putting at risk the lives of several hundred million people (Ives, J. D., 2004).
Although the linkage of human poverty and natural disaster continuous to attract serious debate such paradigm has been discredited by large numbers of research works in the subsequent years. Further with the passage of time the predicted disaster of the catastrophist theory has failed to materialise (Ives, 2004). It has, as a result, opened the way for a more realistic appraisal of the actual dynamics of change in the region. The International conference on the ‘Himalaya-Ganges Problem’ held at Mohonk Mountain House, New York in May 1986 served as an initial platform to debunk the theory of Himalayan environmental degradation. In fact, the very objective of the conference was to discuss, debate and investigate the prevailing Himalayan environmental paradigm of the 1970s and 1980s on the floor. The conference brought to light that the Theory lacked scientific substantiation. It, more importantly, paved the way to the publication of 'The Himalayan Dilemma: Reconciling Development and Conservation' under the authorship of two great scholars (Ives and Messerli, 1989) where the authors challenged the prevailing Himalayan environmental notion and asked for a more focused and rigorous empirical research in order to substantiate the many issues that had been raised.
Since 1989 a vast amount of related environmental research has been undertaken. They are scattered widely across the literature. However, majority of them support the findings of Ives and Messerli (e. g. Thompson, 1995, Forsyth, 1996, Hofer and Messerli, 2002, Ives, 2004). Today, it is accepted, at least among researchers, that the assumed agent-s of environmental threat in the Himalayas advocated by the Theory of Himalayan Environmental Degradation is far from truth. Rather, there are other pertinent forces including geomorphic, socio-economic, administrative, (geo) political, and ethnic/religious (including terrorism) that have played major role in directing the human security in the region over the years and have acted as dominant causes of instability in the region.
posted by Vimal Khawas at 2:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home