Rights of Nature: Ganges River as a Living Entity

Adiska Paramita
Student Number: 931015005050
Master of Leisure, Tourism and Environment, Wageningen University

SDC-30806 Governance, Livelihood, and Resources

Essay submitted on 18 June 2017
Email: adiska.paramita@wur.nl

Abstract

The interplay between different type of power and social norms in India towards Ganga River imply two
consequences. Firstly, making nature as a legal identity potential to become a game-changer in legally
enforcing environmental protection. Secondly, the shifting of cultural and religious values in India are the
reasons of the absence of social punishments. Hence it is the cornerstone of states intervention to
distribute their power over life as the entry point to new conservation strategy. The conception of
Hinduism also known as way of life rather than religion. It considers individual development more rather
than communal interrelation. As the condition of Ganges is getting worse, government intervention as a
disciplinary constitution to protect the holy river came up with new regulation to humanise Ganges
River. The main result is the tendency of faded ethical values in the society of India has led to an
argument that requires a radical reform and adjustment in current social and environmental problem.
Therefore, the strategy by the government is imposing new ‘conduct of conduct’ to reduce
environmental damage. The influence of biopolitics and biopower are also significant elements in the
analysing the power dynamics in this cultural phenomenon. Through this essay, the shifting of power is
being explored to analyse the social and environmental problems in Ganges River.
Introduction

India is well known for its history as a land of spirituality and philosophical tradition. It has contributed as
the birthplace of some religions. Currently, the most dominant religion in India is Hinduism. As a pagan
religion, Hinduism is holding on philosophy with a vast gallery of Gods and Goddesses. The Hindu
perceives sacred presence working behind the forms of nature as their inner spirit (Frawley, 2012).
Referring to that, in every aspect of Hindu philosophy has considered environmental dimension based on
comprehensive spiritual science. The principle of sacredness and life of harmony are immersed in social
aspects of Hinduism in India. They express the connection through rituals to honour the place or nature
itself as a manifestation of Divinity. One of the sacred nature in India's Ganges river. The river is
worshipped as "Ganga Mata", a goddess who purifies a person of all sins (Krishnakumar, 2017).
However, although it is considered as a holy river, it is one of ten most polluted rivers in the world (Black,
2016). It is estimated a billion gallons of waste are being dumped into Ganges river due to
industrialisation and rapid urbanisation. The impact of this phenomena has led to assumptions that the
impact of religion values to protect the holy river is no longer able to stop and control people to
contaminate Ganges river.

Recently, Ganges river has become highlights in online newspapers because of its new status granted by
The Court of North Indian State of Uttarakhand as a living entity (Sachdev, 2017). The fundamental
reason for this decision relates to the critical function of Ganga river which provides both physical and
spiritual substance to the Indian population. The implication of this new status is a shift of paradigm that
considered nature not only as a valuable resource but also a living entity entails with fundamental rights,
duties, and liabilities. The utilisation of legal status to the river is a breakthrough of governmentality in
the way communities reckon nature’s right is equal as human. This approach is a manifestation of the
governance intervention technique through power over life. It is indisputable this strategy accounts for
the product of the political process. As the sacredness of nature is not a new thing in traditional
societies, the high respect to nature from the traditional cultures of indigenous people has been
emerged from many parts of the world. However, Ganges River is not the first river that is recognized as
living entities, Whanganui River represents its interests and advocates on its behalf by the approval of
the New Zealand’s parliament in 2016 (Pearlman, 2017). The case of environmental degradation in
Whanganui River is not as complex as the case in Ganges River. The decision to focus on Ganges River in
this essay is due to the multiple elements such as cultural and religious values that might support or
neglect the implementation of Biopower by the India’s government.

1
As mentioned before, the control over life in modern society is being taken away by the state. The
shifting of authority in glorifying the nature both from the context of religion and ethnic group are new
social phenomena that refer to biopower. On the one hand, it could be a powerful tool in restoring the
Ganga river, on the contrary, this modern law has amplified the concept of biopower in ruling control
through a multiplicity of forces that make up ‘life’ or ‘living beings (Anderson, 2010). The analysis of
Ganges River as living entities in this essay is emphasising three notions of governance theories such as
biopower, biopolitics, and governmentality. The differences of these conceptual frameworks reflected in
the definition of each concept accordingly. Biopower is the use of aggregate technologies such as
demographics and bio-statistics to govern over life. Biopolitics is the kind of politics that surrounds the
use of such techniques. Governmentality are the kind of policies and programs that established to
pursue biopolitical goals. The baseline of these definitions is referring to the Foucault’s theory to
elaborate the analysis of Ganges River. This essay points out the shifting of social mechanism in society
from disciplinary power to biopower and its implication in cultural and environmental perspective of
India.

2
1. Political Ecology of Ganges River
1.1 Traditional Ecological Value of Hinduism in India

As the major religion in India, Hinduism has a variety of philosophical, sacred stories, and ritual
traditions. One of the prominent views in Hinduism is the relation between religion and nature. The
assimilation of Hindu traditions and the natural world has led to the immersion of culture, religion, and
environment as systems of belief. Their action in everyday life implements positive attitude towards
nature as inherent respect in Hinduism. Accordingly, it aligns with the role of Hindu tradition as a
significant factor in raising social and environmental awareness (Van Horn, 2006). The cornerstone of it is
the value of continuities in the cycle of life as what Hinduism taught in Karma and Reincarnation scheme.
It reinforces the possibility of transformation in an environmental paradigm which represent to the way
they treat nature. One point to note, the ideology of Hinduism that empowers these relations between
religion and ecology are reflected in Dharma. According to Flood (1996), Dharma is an all-encompassing
ideology which incorporating the idea of truth, ethics, law, and natural law. This religion-ethical concept
of Dharma has been centered in Hinduism school of thought as the source of guidance. The sanction of
the disobey to Dharma is considered as unrighteous behaviour and sins. The implication of the
convergence of moral values and environmental responsibility has promoted harmony and balance
relationship between human and nature among adherents of Hinduism. It depicts the worship of
physical landscapes named as Gods or Goddess in which Hindu rituals take place.

Although the scriptural passages on Dharma have emphasized the positive attitudes in the relation
between human and nature, it is contradictory with the fact that environmental degradation has
occurred in several sacred nature and sites. The concept of nature in Dharma, which is firmly rooted in
the principles of utilitarian conservation, is being threatened in India by secular individualism and
governmental pyramid systems (Van Horn, 2006) due to caste politics. In other words, besides the
impact of individual ignorance, environmental issues exist from the cultural and social structure system
within the society of India which is institutionalized and legally recognized. The point of this can be seen
in the way society is governed. As we know, India has recognized social caste as an unjust system in
which people are categorized based on their descent. According to Van Horn, the implementation of
India’s law is rarely reach the top pyramid of these societal layers which caused injustice of legal
practices. As a result, the divinity concept of nature in Hinduism has become eroded just like in many
religious traditions in the modern era. It is related to complex urban social problems which support the
discrepancies of perception and behavior. The dissonance of Hindu’s dogma and environmental

3
degradation has an implication that Hinduism requires radical reform concerning ecological and
conservation of nature.

Among many of sacred physical landscapes in India, the river is considered as sacred since it is able to
provide the primary source of life and spiritual needs to purify inner being according to Hinduism. One of
the popular pilgrimage and holy rivers in India is Ganges River. Ganges River is considered as a divine
mother of other gods (Krishnakumar, 2017). The religion values have been immersed in the cultural
aspect in India. The implementation of rituals and traditions in Ganges River has contributed to the
increasing pollution of the river. The cultural and religion values are becoming blurry in the society,
particularly the act of locals who live around the river. The sacred of Ganges River stumble upon the its
function. One the one hand, it fulfils basic needs of poor communities who lives along the river such as
drinking, bathing, sanitation, and washing clothes on a daily basis. On the other hand, it has a role in
facilitating pilgrimage tradition and rituals of worshiping in Hindu. In order to perform Hindu’s ritual,
pilgrims are suggested to take a holy dip in the Ganges River to clean themselves from past sins. The
beliefs to conduct religion values also appear in the way Hindu perceived Ganges River as a route to
heaven and to escape reincarnation cycle. Although majority of Hindu undertakes these activities,
however there is less attention to conserve Ganges River.

1.2 The Ganges as Living Entity

The current condition of Ganges river is severely polluted as the result of household and industrial
wastes are floating on the river. The level of pollution has exceeded the tolerance limit of government
standard in which Ganges river is considered as dangerous threats to human health and environment
(Conaway, 2015). A solution to overcome it, Government of India established a grand design to manage
it in 1986, named Ganga Action Plan (GAP). However, it is considered as major failure to mitigate these
socio-ecological problems (Gardner, 2003). Several governance issues occurred such as corruption, lack
of technical expertise, and lack of support from religious authorities (Puttick, 2008). In the response
toward the state governments of doing nothing concrete act to mitigate the ecological harm of Ganges
River, The Uttarakhand High Court (UHC) declared new status for the river as a living entity (Sachdev,
2017). As the governance system in India is using the concept of meditation (source:
http://highcourtofuttarakhand.gov.in/). This system of governance allows reaching agreements between
two parties by the intervene of the mediator from UHC. In this case, the entanglement of this new
regulation means it treated Ganges River as a person and implies to harming it equal to harming a
human being. It is considered as the changes of strategy to govern the river, from the traditional method

4
of management to the subjectification of nature to curb environmental destruction. The regulation
positioned Ganges River in critical condition where industrial waste and cultural traditions harm it
continuously. In this sense, there are two implications of this new legal status, it could be the powerful
tools to reduce pollution and it might raise conflict in the cultural-religion aspects of Hinduism in India.

The critical evaluation emerge from the role of Ganges River as sacred and holy landscape has ended up
as landfills. It is important to note that, the implementation of new legal status may be violating the
tradition and beliefs which already exist as part of India-Hindus identity. For instance, the belief to drown
corpse into Ganges River as enactment of reaching Nirvana will be considered as illegal. Reflecting to
Ganga Action Plan, in the implementation of Ganges as living entity need to cooperate with Hindu
authority/priests to preserve Hindu customs and tradition and at the same time re-enforce
environmental rights. Otherwise, the implementation of government’s governing strategy to manage the
environmental degradation in the Ganges River would never be success. The controversy of Ganges as
legal living entity is reinforcement of environmental moral rights being subjected to pollution. The
liabilities and duties of Ganges river is becoming a headline, how well the Chief of the National Mission
for Cleaning Ganga as “legal parents” work as human face to rejuvenate the holy river. The implication of
treating nature as human being aligned with Lercher’s argument (2007). Lercher stated that ontological
status from rights of nature equal with right as human being from negligently, recklessly, or intentionally
imposing risk on her (Ganges River). However, this right cannot prevent her from destruction. It means
that, the power of this law is prosecuting violation of law against her, if other party litigate the problems
to UHC. Consequently, moral and ethics of individual are significant to build a sustainable world
regardless the law formulation that is designed to protect the environment.

1.3 The Nexus of Religion, Culture, and Power

In purpose to have a better understanding of environmental degradation, it is considerably important to

analyse the interaction of humans and the environment. As mentioned before, the complexity of Indian
cultural values is paired up with the ecological crisis in Ganges River. The cause of the problem is rooted
in social perception towards nature, precisely the function of the river. It results from different
comprehension towards waste management which may lead to social conflict between Hindus and the
India’s government. Since the domination of cultural values has overlay the hegemonic power, ritual
practice based on custom and tradition constituted their behaviour. According to the myth, Ganges
water has the power to purify the souls and magical properties to keep the water pure. In contrast,
according to (Mallet, 2015), the water contained toxic and considered as disease-bearing. These

5
traditions that polluted Ganges River has obscured the ethics and guideline of Dharma concept in
Hinduism. Since Hindu is a pagan religion, traditions are influential factors in the conception of Hinduism.
In response to that, development method needs to adjust and consider cultural values in India as unique
social phenomena. Accordingly, science and traditions need to cooperate rather than be treated as
separate elements. According to Stott and Sullivan (2000), science and myth can collaborate to identify
and dismantle hegemonic myths in preserving Ganges River. In this analysis, the realisation of Ganges
River as living entity represent the control over life is being taken away by the government which
threatened and contradicted with the cultural values of Hinduism in India.

2. Foucault’s Notion of Biopower, Biopolitics and Governmentality

In the case of Ganges River, the contribution of government to take in charge in preserving the river has
several implications. The prominent aspect of life, culture, is having two sides in the environment and
ecological discourse. However, it is important to keep in mind contextual analysis in discussing one
phenomenon as problems because it is radically different posed by each culture. In this case, culture and
tradition have led to controversial issues since its practices are not ecologically friendly. The intervention
of government to solve these matters is an interesting standpoint to analyse the shifting of power over
life in India. In this sense, three principal notions of power by Foucault will enrich the analysis of Ganges
River as living entity.

2.1 The Concept of Biopower

Michel Foucault is well-known as the great influential philosopher and historian from post-structuralist
paradigm due to his controversial ideas. He was also a historian since he used history to analyse how
individual exercises power. During his life, he contributed in the several theories about conceptions of
power and knowledge in the broad encompassing perspective of time. However, Foucault’s view of
power is not an exclusive periodization, nor do different modes of power vanish, even if they have been
replaced as the dominant form. Foucault’s analysis re-conceptualises power as omnipresent and can be
found in all social interactions, interwoven to be present in all our social relations, even our most
intimate and egalitarian society (Lynch, 2011). It appears that power has been immersed in every aspect
of life. One of the extensive analyses he had developed was biopower. According to Foucault (1976),
Biopower refers to a technology of power to control the entire population. This technology constituted
different techniques to intervene vital characteristic of human presence such as births, deaths,
reproduction, and illness by the disciplinary institution. It has the capacity to govern individuals to do
something to take care of the self. It is also important to note that historical phases have transformed

6
different type of power such as disciplinary and sovereignty power. The relation between disciplinary,
sovereignty, and biopower has shaped Foucault’s triangle of power analysis (Dean, 2010). In simple
words, disciplinary is fundamental rule or norm in society that controls individual behaviour. In this
context, punishment is enacted towards abnormal behaviour. It is contrasted with sovereignty power in
which is exercised by the structure of government using law or regulations. In the modern era, biopower
integrates sovereignty and disciplinary power (Seidman and Alexander, 2001). Consequently, biopower is
exercised by state apparatus to encourage productivity of individual within the ethical behaviour.

The declaration of Ganges River as living entities signifies its rights as equal as human beings under
Indian constitution. This decision was taken by the UHC as legal action to protect this holy but heavily
polluted river. The establishment of a new status of Ganges River is the implementation of intervention
by the government to apply their power towards a crucial entity in Indian population. This new status
implies government technique for achieving and affirming its power over the body of individual and
population in general through environmental protection acts. Consequently, a set of mechanisms is used
to consider Ganges River as the object of governmental strategy to improve the wellbeing of the
population. The recognition of natural landscape as part of a controlled population, the Indian
government has delivered a breakthrough strategy by the arrangement of non-living things in the
governance system to foster life. The implementation of biopower in Ganges River is referring to the
right to kill (punish) to the people that harm or contaminate the river. However, it is important to
consider the pollution in Ganges River are not only industrial or business that litter the river, but also the
locals. From my perspective, although Ganges River is considered as a holy river, rituals and traditions of
Hinduism in Ganges River contaminate the river. It was a great decision taken by the Indian government
to grant a legal status to the river as a technology of governing by combining disciplines and regulatory
control. This intervention is the realisation of the administration of life by the government for the
purpose of the health of the population through environmental conservation.

2.2 The Concept of Biopolitics

Besides biopower, biopolitics is another term appointed by Foucault to denote political power over life.
According to Lemke et al. (2011), biopolitics aim at the administration and regulation of life process in
the level of populations by using policies and natural sciences to foster human life. It is a complex
concept to examine the strategies and mechanism of authority since it constitutes knowledge, power
and subjectivation (Rebughini, 2014). In the analysing of biopolitics, it takes society (horizontal relation)
as the focal point rather than the state (top-down approach). The immensity of biopolitics is treating the

7
number of population in a territory by considering the liberty of individuals to govern themselves. These
liberal thoughts are the standpoint to review the mechanism of ruling in post-structuralist perspectives.
Consequently, the analysis of biopolitics is relevant to point out the purpose of government’s
intervention to support a particular form of life, while approving the others may be let die (Cavanagh,
2014).

However, the logic of biopolitics is often used to justify the immediate exploitation of nature and people
by the government. The analysis of biopolitics reveals the government intention to consider Ganges
River as the body of a human. I hold the view that the legal entity status of Ganges River will not
contribute to significant changes of Ganges River conservation. The practice of biopolitics in Ganges
River has violated the responsibility of the government. By treating the river with human law, it raises a
double standard of conserving the river. In other words, the decision to consider Ganges River as a legal
entity is part of the abundance of government’s responsibility in restoring the Ganges to the society. The
implementation of personification of nature is a set of regulation mechanism that encourages (and push)
the community to in charge and to take collective actions by being proactive in conserving Ganges River.

2.3 The Concept of Governmentality

In order to understand the complexity of governing the population, Foucault identifies the relation
between the state and modern liberal society as the issue with security. He emphasised new terms to
connect the whole governed population, government and security under the idea of governmentality.
According to Lemke (2002), the semantic linking of governing and modes of thought indicates the
foundation of analysing political rationality is important to break open technologies of power.
Governmentality is strongly related to the constitution of power techniques and forms of knowledge. It
can be seen from the forms of power and processes of subjectification. A different form of power has
been perceived in all aspects of life in order to manage self and wider social relation. In this sense,
Foucault reconceptualised government as the conduct of conduct (Foucault, 2008) or the regulations of
behaviour. It is the manifestation of the guiding force of individuals by using authorities’ principle.
Therefore, governmentality connects with biopolitics power regarding individuals’ ontology based on
their capacity to act through the establishment of policies and regulation.

The strategy of combining government and rationality to tackle the problem of the state and population
is a method that able to explain the underlying relationship between people and institution. Hence the
contextual approach also needs to be considered when analysing the Ganges River. It is such a paradox

8
to see the holiest river in India is one of ten most polluted rivers in the world. There is a missing link to
explain the way people behave to pollute the river they hold sacred. In my view, the challenge to
conserve the river is the multiple realities regarding the beliefs that are being perceived by the Hindus.
According to Hollick (2007), Hindus consider Ganges River has extraordinary power to clean itself. At this
point, it is important to take into account the differences/gap between logical values to conserve for the
sake of environmental sustainability and the ethical values that influence the perception of Hindus
towards Ganges River. Consequently, the status of the river as a legal entity is the realisation of a
horizontal approach to treat the river as a human, not as the Goddess. This strategy by the government
directed the conduct of individuals and their way of thinking towards the river.

2.4 The Analysis of Biopolitics and Governmentality in Relation to Ethical Values

The central principle that underlies the basis of the universe according to the Vedas is Dharma (Rao,
1926). It stands for a doctrine of Hindu philosophy that accounts for moral life for the Hindu. The
function of Dharma as the guideline for the believers is a moral order and a code for life. As the man
principle, it becomes the conduct of conduct of the Hindus in the society. According to Framarin (2014),
Dharma constituted plausible environmental ethic with direct moral standing towards individual and
non-human entities in nature. In other words, the respect towards the rights of non-human entities has
been stated in the text and traditions of Hindu. However, it does not significantly influence the
behaviour to conserve the river. It is supposed to be the regulation of behaviour to manage the moral
order in Indian society. Therefore, drawing on the absence of disciplinary power is also related to
philosophical logic within Hinduism school of thought about Karma law. As the universal principle of
cause and effect, Karma considers present actions determine future states of being (Silvestre, 2016).
Accordingly, Karma and Dharma are the tools that regulated the Hindus perception in the vertical and
horizontal relation.

The personification of nature as equal as a human in the legal right is a tricky regulation. Its
implementation relies on the community participation in identifying and preventing potential
problems/harms toward the river. It is also important to note that, the environmental degradation is not
only due to industrial waste, but also some traditions and rituals of Hinduism which are polluting the
river. The lack of awareness of people to protect the Ganges from pollution strengthen the argument
that social norms do not influence significantly to the waste management in India. As a result, the waste
management is neglected and resulted in unclear social punishment towards any environmental
violation in the river. Since the new regulation is ruling, the new system of governance by the

9
government is taking over the cultural and religious values in managing the relationship between human
and environment. The new regulation by the government is shadowing the existing power in ethical
values of Hinduism. The ethical values that are socially constructed lead to an argument that requires a
radical reform and adjustment in current social and environmental problem. Therefore, the strategy by
the government is imposing new ‘conduct of conduct’ to reduce environmental damage. However, it is
crucial to encompass norms of Hindus to enrich the perspective of contextual analysis to solve these
social and environmental issues. Thus, the incorporation of government way of conduct in conserving
Ganges River and ethical values are necessary to reach conformity of local communities.

Conclusion

The personification of nature is examined as a game changer in environmental conservation strategy.

The influence of Hindu ethics of governing the nature does not impact to the awareness of local or
Hindus to take any actions to conserve and sustain the river. The baseline of this argument is referring to
the fact that Ganges River’s level of pollution is quite high. The severe environmental damage in the river
is linked to the cultural phenomena in India such as caste politics, lack of environmental awareness in the
society, and the impact of Karma as the responsibility of any sin relates to the individual future by
reincarnation rather than punishment in current life. Concerning the ecological degradation in Ganges
River, further research is needed to prove my assumption by linking the law of Dharma as ethics of the
Hindus in Indian society and their willingness to rehabilitate ecological damage in the sacral sites. The
central question that I can come up with is ‘why the Hindus in India neglect Dharma concerning the
environmental conservation of Ganges River?’ As the role of Hindu ethics seems faded in this modern
era, ethnography study might be able to answer this by learning patterns of values, behavior, and beliefs
of a culture in India.

10
 References

Anderson, B. (2012). Affect and biopower: towards a politics of life. Transactions of the Institute of
British Geographers, 37(1), 28-43.

Black, G. (2016, July). What It Takes to Clean The Ganges. Retrieved from
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/what-it-takes-to-clean-the-ganges

Cavanagh, C. J. (2014, May). Biopolitics, environmental change, and development studies. In Forum
for Development Studies (Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 273-294). Routledge.

Conaway, C., ( 2015, September) The Ganges River Is Dying Under the Weight of Modern India.
Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/2015/10/02/ganges-river-dying-under-weight-
modern-india-375347.html

Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society. Sage publications.

Flood, G. D. (1996). An introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge University Press.

Foucault, Michel (1979) [1976]. The History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction. London: Allen
Lane.

Foucault, M., (2008), The birth of biopolitics. Lectures at the College de France, 1978‐79. Palgrave
MacMillan

Framarin, C. G. (2014). Hinduism and Environmental Ethics: Law, Literature, and Philosophy.
Routledge.

Frawley, D. (2012, June). Hindu View of Nature. Retrieved from

https://vedanet.com/2012/06/13/hindu-view-of-nature/

Hollick, J. C. (2007, December). Mystery Factor Gives Ganges a Clean Reputation. Retrieved from
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17134270

Krishnakumar, S. (2017, April). Could making the Ganges a 'person' save India's holiest river?
Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-39488527

Lemke, T., Casper, M. J., & Moore, L. J. (2011). Biopolitics: An advanced introduction. NYU Press.

11
Lemke, T. (2002). Foucault, governmentality, and critique. Rethinking marxism, 14(3), 49-64.

Lercher, A. (2007). Are there any Environmental Rights?. Environmental Values, 16(3), 355-368.

Lynch, R. (2011). Foucault's theory of power. In D. Taylor (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Key Concepts
(pp.13-27). Durham: Acumen Publishing.

Mallet, V., (2015, February). The Ganges: holy, deadly river. Retrieved from
https://www.ft.com/content/dadfae24-b23e-11e4-b380-00144feab7de

Puttick, E. (2008). Mother Ganges, India’s sacred river. Emoto M The healing power of water. Hay
House Inc, Carlsbad, California. p, 275, 241-252.

Pearlman, J., (2017, March) New Zealand river to be recognised as living entity after 170-year legal
battle. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/15/new-zealand-river-
recognised-living-entity/

Rao, G. H. (1926). The Basis of Hindu Ethics. The International Journal of Ethics, 37(1), 19-35.

Rebughini, P. (2014). Subject, subjectivity, subjectivation. Sociopedia. Isa.

Sachdev, V. (2017, March). Ganga is Now a Living Entity What Does It Means for The River. Retrieved
from https://www.thequint.com/environment/2017/03/20/ganga-is-now-a-living-entity-what-
does-it-mean-for-the-river-uttarakhand-high-court-order

Seidman, S., & Alexander, J. C. (2001). The new social theory reader: contemporary debates.
Psychology Press.

Silvestre, R. S. (2016). Karma Theory, Determinism, Fatalism and Freedom of Will. Logica Universalis,
1-26.

Stott, P. A., & Sullivan, S. (2000). Political ecology: science, myth and power.

Van Horn, G. (2006). Hindu Traditions and Nature: Survey Article. Worldviews: Global Religions,
Culture, and Ecology, 10(1), 5-39.

12