The laboratory of development
How will vast regions of India, where highly unreliable rainfall makes the difference between famine and sustenance, cope with climate change? Over 85 per cent of the cultivated area in this country
Search Results
-
-
Focus on farm sector
By Devinder Sharma Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram should address the woes of those ailing farmers in the budget. General elections are around the corner. It is therefore more of a political compulsion than the requirements of a prudent fiscal policy that should have automatically diverted public funds for the ailing agrarian sector. Unfortunately, the game plan all these years has been to ignore agriculture and instead pamper the bloated rich of big business to grow richer. No budget is complete without the Finance Minister reminding the country, with possibly a catchy phrase thrown-in, the Herculean task his budget will perform in addressing the agrarian crisis. P Chidambaram is no exception. He often quotes a couplet from the writings of some of the best-known poets, saints and thinkers of south India. After all, 60 per cent of the population is still directly engaged in farming. Despite all these efforts to rescue agriculture, the annual budget has truly been a carnival for the rich and beautiful. As the veteran economist Kamal Nayan Kabra reminds us: "Indeed, the corporate income tax foregone by the government is trivially less than the total amount spent by both the central government and the 28 state governments on all rural development schemes.' Accordingly, in 2004-05 Rs 2.06 lakh crore was the revenue loss from the numerous tax concessions, exemptions and incentives, the total excise, customs and personal income tax and corporate income tax exemptions. In 2005-06, these exemptions amounted to Rs 2.35 lakh crore. For the debt-ridden farmers, and despite reports of farmers suicides regularly pouring in from various parts of the country, the Finance Minister will gloat while announcing that he has managed to meet the target of providing Rs 2.25 lakh crore as farm credit in 2007-08. Ironically, this is less than the total revenue loss of Rs 2.35 lakh crore incurred a year earlier from tax exemptions for India Inc. Isn't it therefore strange economics? What millions of farmers get is simple gratitude (and credit), whereas a few hundred rich walk away with almost an equal amount as direct income (money saved by way of tax exemptions is like money earned). Why can't the industries be asked to avail more credit, and let the direct income be for the farmers? I have often wondered as to how does the economist justify more credit to farmers who are already reeling under the burden of non-repayment of credit. Well, everyone knows that farmers are committing suicide because they cannot repay back the loans. Mounting indebtedness is the reason behind the death toll on the farm. Why can't the Finance Minister make an honest effort to pull these farmers from the credit trap? Why can't the Finance Minister actually provide farmers with more steady and assured monthly income? After all, like all of us what the farmers too need is a monthly take-home income package. The first step that needs to be taken is to write-off the outstanding dues of small and marginal farmers owning less than 5 acres of land in irrigated areas and 20 acres in un-irrigated regions. There is already a talk of writing-off Rs 65,000-crore, including Rs 25,000-crore, which the nationalised banks fear would be the non-performing asset. The accumulating losses that the farm sector has been incurring year after year are much higher than this amount. Such bad debts need to be immediately struck off so as to provide a new lease of life to the debt-ridden farmer. In fact, the UPA government should have done this soon after it came into power in May 2004. At the same time, lowering the interest rate for farm loans to 4 per cent across board is also required. In China, the interest rate for credit to small farmers has been abolished. Along with this, what is more important and does not require any fiscal outlay is the need to abolish the draconian law that was enacted during the British Raj. Between 1904 and 1912, the British had framed Public Demand Recovery Act, under which farmers could be jailed for defaulting the State for a paltry sum. So much so that even the jail expenses were to be borne by the farmers. The banks have very cleverly used the same provisions for debt recovery in agriculture. Striking out the bad debt needs to be accompanied by a new farm policy that guarantees against making this a recurring exercise. Unless the government ensures that the National Food Security Mission and the Rs 25,000-crore fund it has set aside for agriculture as per the recommendation of the National Development Council are diverted to a nationwide Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture (LEISA) programme, the cycle of mounting indebtedness and then writing-off loans will not end. Replacing the current system of fertiliser subsidy wherein the government reimburses the industry for production expenses can make a beginning. Fertiliser subsidy, which is expected to touch Rs 50,000-crore in the near term, should in future be provided directly to farmers. What is acting as a roadblock for implementing this recommendation is the lack of political consensus. Farmers should be encouraged to utilise this subsidy for shifting to organic means of production. Such an initiative will drastically reduce the cost of production, rejuvenate the soils, provide income to farmers and also reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
-
Focus may be on NREGA, debt relief for farmers
Chidambaram may try to shift attention from high prices of essentials If everybody, including political parties, is talking about farmers it must be election time. Close to election, it has become more or less a trend for the government of the day to announce sops for the agriculture and rural sectors in its budget proposals. So even while the common man has to swallow the bitter pill of the "inevitable' petrol and diesel hike before the 2008-09 budget, there is a promise of a "populist budget' for farmers and the aam garib aadmi this year. Low growth rate With several States going to the polls this year ahead of the next year's Lok Sabha election, there may be an attempt to shift the attention from the high prices of essential commodities, low growth rate (2.3 per cent in the 10th Plan) in agriculture, the disconnect between a high Gross Domestic Product and the rural sector, with problems of displacement, migration, unemployment, suicides by farmers and impending food crisis. This budget is most likely to convey the last ditch attempt of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government to redeem itself from the scars caused in the countryside by farmer suicides and dispossession of rural families on account of Special Economic Zones and other industrialisation projects. Without doubt, the Debt Relief Package for Institutional Loanee Farmers (as reported first in The Hindu) and the expansion of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) Programme will be at the centre of Finance Minister P. Chidambaram's budget proposals. Fertilizer policy Besides, it is expected that he will unveil a rationalised fertilizer policy to encourage balanced use of fertilizers, especially muriates, to revive farm soil. Some succour is also essential for the wives of indebted farmers who committed suicide. There is a growing demand to strengthen the National Agriculture Insurance Scheme (NAIS) and to have a Health Insurance Scheme for farm households, as various surveys showed that most the credits in the informal sector were not only farming related but also to meet the requirements of health, celebrations and even life-style. From all accounts, the pilot weather-based crop insurance may be expanded. Fund requirements It is estimated that the total fund requirement for the expansion of the NREGA from the present 330 districts to 600-odd will be about Rs. 16,000 crore. On the other hand, the debt relief, covering an estimated 35 per cent farmers who had availed themselves of bank loans, is estimated at Rs. 40,000 crore in the first year. The Union government will pay off the dues to banks. A Price Stabilisation Fund is also proposed to be set up with contributions from the government, banks and farmers. Well-placed sources hinted that the Finance Minister may cull out unspent funds from social sectors such as rural development, education and health to partially meet the requirement of the Farmers' Debt Relief Package. It is anybody's guess if the Minister will reduce the interest rate on farm loans from the current 7 to 4 per cent as recommended by the National Commission on Farmers. There is also a demand to raise the credit limit under the Kisan Credit Card scheme. There is an expectation that enhanced budgetary support will continue for the flagship rural programmes, including the swarozgar yojana (self-self groups), Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana, Indira Awas Yojana and the Drinking Water Supply programme. The highest increase, however, is expected in the Land Resources Programme under the Integrated Wasteland Management Programme. In the agriculture sector, allocation has to be enhanced for the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana to enhance production and productivity and to the National Food Security Mission to increase the output of rice, wheat and pulses. Both schemes are new and yet to take off. Irrigation schemes, horticulture mission and agriculture research will get the customary support, as growth in farm "allied sectors' comes from these areas. The National Rainfed Area Authority is most certainly likely to get financial support. Food subsidy The food subsidy bill is likely to cross the Rs 30,000 crore-mark. This is due to the wide difference between the minimum support prices (MSP) paid to farmers and the central issue price of grains sold through the Public Distribution System, as well as on account of the food grains import bill. The subsidy bill to go up further as the food grain stocks are expected to dwindle by April 1, possibly resulting in more imports. With apprehensions of an avian influenza pandemic, a comprehensive rehabilitation package for the poultry industry and bird flu-affected farmers, as part of a Bio-Security Policy, will be announced in the budget, if not earlier. However, the package may include only such poultry farmers, who get linked to institutional poultry farms and the industry. It remains to be seen how the government's packages will play out for the thousands of those in the informal sector who do not have the income and the collateral to avail themselves of institutional loans. Funds utilisation It is expected that in this last year of the UPA government's regime, the emphasis will be on consolidation, with focus on better implementation, monitoring and utilisation of funds. In particular, the Congress has shown signs of being zealous of taking credit for the central funds made available to States, to reap a harvest during election time. The biggest challenge, however, is making agriculture viable for the 82 per cent small and marginal farmers and bailing them out of the clutches of the informal system of borrowing.
-
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.
-
Farm loan waiver: a closer look and critique (editorial)
A. Vaidyanathan Loan waivers are at best temporary palliatives to the problems facing rural India. Regrettably, the powers that be and the powers that want to be have rarely been willing to confront the difficult and complex problems. The decision to waive farm loans on an unprecedented scale announced in the latest Budget has attracted widespread comment. Almost all political parties have welcomed the move. In fact, most of them were vociferously clamouring for such a measure to relieve the farm sector from a "crushing' burden of debt. The Budget speech has announced the decision to waive farm loans and also estimated the cost (Rs. 60,000 crore) that government has to bear. It does not spel l out the basis of the estimate nor of the institutions, loan categories, and class of borrowers that will be covered by the scheme. Several aspects need to be clarified: 1. By definition, the scheme can apply only to those who have outstanding loans with institutions. Nearly three-fourths of all rural households and 60 per cent of farm households report that they do not have any outstanding debt. All households with outstanding debt may not have outstanding institutional debt. Thus the large majority of even farmers will not benefit from the waiver. If only farmer loans are eligible, the proportion of beneficiaries will be even smaller. 2. Both access to institutional credit and the proportion of outstanding debt are skewed in favour of larger farms. Cultivator households with less than 2 hectares account for 85 per cent of all farm households; and report a lower incidence of debt (46 per cent) and of outstanding debt (30 per cent) than the overall average. 3. Institutional loans include direct lending (to meet needs production as well as consumption) and "indirect lending' for allied activities (such as input distribution, trading, transport and processing of farm produce). The latter comprise about half of outstanding loans of cooperatives; 55 per cent in regional rural banks; and a little under half in scheduled commercial banks. There is hardly any justification for waivers on indirect loans. 4. The magnitude of outstanding debt of rural households, going by National Sample Survey (NSS) data, is less than outstanding debt reported by the institutions in the cooperatives and substantially so in regional rural banks. Since both are intended to lend mostly in rural areas, this difference suggests that they also carry a sizeable portfolio of non-household, non-rural loans. 5. The basis of the estimate that the waiver will cost Rs 60, 000 crore is far from clear. There is good reason to believe that a generalised waiver of all overdues will benefit non-rural borrowers to a considerable extent; that the large majority of rural households, including those in the below 2 hectares category will not benefit; and that the magnitude of benefit accruing to them will be considerably less than Rs.60, 000 crore. Benefits in rural areas will accrue to a rather small fraction of households and the magnitude of relief to the beneficiaries is likely to be considerably less than the cited figure. Larger adverse effects These considerations argue for a close second look at the rationale, scope, and intent of the scheme. But it is also necessary to warn the public of the larger adverse effects of waivers on the rural credit system. Supporters of the scheme argue that this one time relief is a necessary measure to address the current agrarian crisis and that it would enable farmers to restart on a clean state. But this has been said every time in the past when such waivers were announced. Experience shows that waivers encouraged borrowers to presume that they can sooner or later get away without repaying loans. It reinforces the culture of wilful default, which has resulted in huge overdues and defaults in all segments of organised financial institutions. The deterioration in the cooperative credit system is, in large measure, due to the conscious state policy of interference in the grant and recovery of loans. Cooperatives have by far the greatest reach in terms of accessibility, number of borrowers, and delivery of credit to the rural population. Concerned by their near collapse, the Central government set up a task force to suggest ways to arrest the trend and revive them. The task force suggested radical changes in the legal and institutional framework essential to enable and induce cooperatives to function as autonomous and self-regulating entities. It emphasised the need to eliminate government interference in grant of loans, recovery processes, and waiving of dues from borrowers. Against spirit of reforms The Central government accepted the recommendations. Extensive consultations with States led to a political consensus to accept and implement the reform package. The Central government has committed to provide around Rs. 18,000 crore to clear accumulated losses over a period of time and linked to actual fulfilment of specified conditions. Most States have since given their formal commitment to this effect and agreed to abide by the conditions for availing of Central financial assistance. Supervised implementation is under way and has made significant progress in several States. This programme thus already covers a significant part of what is being attempted in the current waiver scheme. It is ironical that the decision to go for a general waiver comes even as the above reform programme is under way. It obviously goes against the central thrust and spirit of the reform programme. Since the proposed general waiver is wholly underwritten and funded by the Centre, the need for the kind of restructuring and conditionality attached to central assistance is likely to be questioned. Doubts will be raised and pressures will build to dilute or even to override the programme. It is very important that the government clarifies its position on the status of the current reform programme and how such pressures can be contained so that apprehensions about the prospect of much-needed institution reform in cooperative credit institutions are to be allayed. Loan waivers are at best temporary palliatives to the problems facing rural India. Significant and sustained improvement in the welfare of the rural population is not possible without a faster pace of growth in the rural economy and an improved quality of education and health services. Increased public spending will not achieve this. It is essential to address deeper problems rooted in the overexploitation and degradation of land and water; government policies that encourage wasteful use of resources; the inefficiency of public systems responsible for implementing programmes, regulating the use of common service facilities, and ensuring quality infrastructural and support services. Regrettably, the powers that be and powers that want to be have rarely been willing to confront and address these difficult and complex problems. The chances that their attitudes will change are far less in the current state of intense and contentious competitive politics. That does not augur well for the future of rural India. (Dr. A. Vaidyanathan, a development economist, is Honorary Fellow of the Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram.)
-
Getting It Right
Loan waiver for farmers is a good beginning M K Venu A former bureaucrat who had worked with finance minister P Chidambaram in 1997 summed up the 2008-09 Budget aptly in the words of Edmund Burke: "Mere parsimony is not economy. Expenses and great expenses may be an essential part in true economy'. The bureaucrat in question, former revenue secretary N K Singh, had then designed one of the most liberal tax amnesty schemes for the urban rich with a view to mainstreaming sources of black money generation. The amnesty programme had later prompted even the Supreme Court to comment that such schemes must not become regular practice. Those were difficult times when a prolonged growth slump in much of Asia had led to sluggish revenue collections year after year. Budget targets were rarely met, if at all. Consequently, the government had to resort to amnesty schemes, in desperation, to collect more revenues. Things have dramatically changed in recent years. Asia is fast becoming the engine of growth, and India is a big part of the story. The government's revenues have soared from about Rs 2,54,000 crore in 2003-04 to Rs 5,85,000 crore in 2007-08, more than doubling in four years. With its coffers overflowing, the UPA government has chosen to embark on a "great expenses' programme. And why not? If you could give amnesty to the rich in difficult times, why not amnesty to the poor, distressed farmers when the coffers are full up? The Rs 60,000 crore farm loan waiver may have some design flaws, but no one today should quarrel with the sentiment that agriculture, and the small farmer, do need a leg-up. Clearly, the distress in the farm sector in recent years has created an adverse political climate for the UPA, which has been a bit shy of selling more aggressively the unprecedented GDP growth India has seen in the past five years. It is obvious that you cannot sell high GDP growth and bulging forex reserves in large parts of rural India which are in distress. This had also become a cause of persistent friction between the Congress and the Left within the UPA alliance. All this while, it would appear, it is this political tension which had resulted in the growing communication gap between the Congress and the Left. This may have had its spillover effect even on the nuclear deal. The Left would seem to have been somewhat assuaged by the Budget proposals. The CPM general secretary Prakash Karat has for the first time welcomed the farm and social sector programmes announced by the finance minister. This may signal a temporary thaw in the relations between the Congress and CPM. There is talk that the nuclear deal may also get revived, and the Left may not do any more than make some routine noises over it. The larger issue is one of creating a conducive atmosphere in the political economy to build a consensus for further reforms that are critical for India's economy to sustain a 9 per cent growth for the next five years. The massive farm loan waiver and higher spending in social sector programmes must be appropriately used now to bring down the political opposition to further reforms which are important to propel India to the next level in the globalisation sweepstakes. The Budget in some ways has signalled a New Deal, in which every section of society has benefited, whether it's the urban middle class or the rural poor. But these benefits must now be accompanied with some obligation to work towards a common goal. The one common objective, with which the CPM must have no quarrel, is promoting higher levels of industrialisation. The CPM has also formally recorded in its party document that rapid industrialisation is necessary and there is an urgent need to move people from low yield agriculture to industry. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh too has been placing repeated emphasis on this. The only caution that needs to be exercised is this process must be conducted in a democratic, bottom-up fashion. This was the prime lesson of Nandigram and Singur. The farm loan waiver must be seen as a purely temporary relief and there must be some programme by which farm families locked in low-yielding, suboptimal farm activity are moved to non-farm sectors. After one loan waiver, there is no point in their getting into another loan to do unremunerative agriculture. This would be a recipe for future fiscal disasters. Some permanent institutional arrangement must be designed by the Centre and states together to ensure that inherently remunerative farm activity gets a boost with technical, marketing and financial support. The other farm families must be encouraged through new skill development programmes to move to the manufacturing sector. This needs to be done in a focused manner. The Left Front government in West Bengal has designed an elaborate scheme, after the farmer protests in Nandigram, which seeks to handhold farm families for years after their shift to manufacturing townships built on their land. If done democratically, this is the only way to design a long-term solution to the problems of India's farm sector. A rapidly globalising economy just cannot afford 60 per cent of its population in agriculture sharing less than 20 per cent of the national income. This will remain the biggest point of tension in our political economy. The massive farm loan waiver in the Budget only addresses the symptom. Much more needs to be done to address the root cause. The Rs 60,000 crore loan waiver, at least, brings the whole issue to the centre stage. That is clearly a plus.
-
Another co2alition of the willing?
<p>It was the biannual gathering of over 100,000 Protestants in Bremen, a small town in Germany. As the articulate minister for environment, Sigmar Gabriel, came to participate in a discussion on energy security for a climate-secure world, many stood up. Soon the hall was full of blue placards, held high, all saying: “No to coal.” The minister, I could see, was riled.
-
How India is getting gas and coal policy wrong
Two monopolies. One private and the other public; one in gas and one in coal. Both equally disastrous for the environment. I speak here of Reliance Industries Ltd and Coal India Ltd. We know that air
-
Mass transport to mass politics: lessons from Brazil
<p style="line-height: 22px; font-size: 14px; margin-top: 5px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><img alt="image" src="http://www.downtoearth.org.in/dte/userfiles/images/mass.jpg"
-
Latest IPCC report reeks of northern agenda
<div class="authors" style="margin-top: 5px; font-size: 11px; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 15px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> <span class="tagLabel" style="font-weight:
-
Leaving the women in the woods
Forest protection initiatives taken by villagers, though laudable by themselves, have proved to be a bane for women
-
Figuring out natural costs
Many economists now argue that nature cannot be the provider of a perpetual free lunch. It's time to account for natural resource degradation while drawing up balance sheets
-
Off to the next round
The South came back reasonably victorious from Rio, it was only because of the poor leadership of USA. The question now is: will it be able to sustain its success?
-
About Clean Air Portal
<h2 class="title " style="margin-bottom: 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 22px; margin-top: 5px; font-family: arial; padding-left: 15px; padding-top: 10px !important; border-top-width: 0px !important;
-
About us
<div> <strong>What happened to our right to CLEAN AIR! </strong></div> <div> </div> <div> Our campaign started with blowing the lid on smog and exposing the smogmakers in a city where
-
Under international censure
The Singrauli Super Thermal Power Station has managed to secure a World Bank loan of $400 million, but the allegations of environmental degradation levelled against it are mounting
-
Inhumanly polluted
Away from human interference, the virgin Arctic islands are, ironically, more polluted than the distant industrialised settlements. And the reason is a filthy secret
-
The return of Mowgli's mother
Rudyard Kipling gave us unbelievable stories about the humane wolf. Now, a court decision reaffirms the animal's vital role in the ecosystem
-
Glamorous and profitable, too
Biotechnology, which holds the answers to many persistent problems such as controlling disease and increasing food production, has tremendous potential in cash strapped India. But to succeed, it needs a helping hand from industry.
-
When the land shouts
Van Gujjars in the Shivalik foothills vociferously claim managing authority of the Rajaji National Park