PERSPECTIVES
movement; many members of the German
Ideological Trends in Indian
Environmentalism
Ramachandra Guha
The author identifies three strands in the environmental movement
in India—Crusading Gandhian, Appropriate Technology and
Ecological Marxists—and argues that this ideological plurality is
to be welcomed.
I socialists of much help either—here it is
Ecology, Socialism, Ecological
Socialism?
SEVERAL years ago, Ronald Reagan
proclaimed to the British parliament that
his life's ambition was to consign Marxism
to the ash heap of history. Yet the impen-
ding demise of socialism (in whichever of
its variants) has been predicted not merely
by its historic enemies on the right, but
by the radical ecology movement as well.
"We are neither right nor left", assert the
German Greens, "but in front." For many
of its leading theorists, the ecology move-
ment is playing in this century the role
assigned by history to socialism in the last.
The correct radical response to the evils
of nineteenth century capitalism may have
been the socialist movement, but the lat-
ter's heritage is believed to be totally in-
adequate in tackling the contemporary
crises of industrial society. In this vision,
radical ecology may be inheriting the
political mantle of socialism, but at the
same time it rests on a 'paradigm shift'
that opposes it to both socialism and the
common enemy, capitalism (Capra and
Spretnak 1984; Porrit 1984).
in urging the redundancy of the
socialist project, radical ecologists draw
upon both theoretical and empirical
arguments. The mere abolition of private
ownership of the means of production,
they claim, is no guarantor of ecological
stability. So long as socialist countries
continue to follow the capitalist model of
energy intensive industrialisation, both the
exhaustion of resources and environmen-
tal degradation must follow—as witness
the tragedy of Chernobyl, the eutrophica-
tion of Lake Baikal, and the decline of
forests due to acid rain in much of eastern
Europe, If socialists have so enthusi-
astically embraced the industrial economy
of pollution and depletion, environmen-
talists argue, perhaps the fault lies with
their nineteenth century ideology—one
worshipful of economic growth and its
chief instrument, modern science and
technology. Nor is the centralised and
undemocratic political system favoured by
2578
no accident that one of the most visible
consequences of glasnost in the Soviet
Union has been the assertion of grassroots
environmental concerns.
For their part, radical socialists (or
Marxists) are equally dismissive of radical
ecologists. (As used here, 'radical' refers
only to the self image of the groups
concerned—it has no other normative
connotation.) We have the familiar cari-
cature of an environmentalist as one who
shows more concern for tigers and flam-
ingoes than for the less fortunate members
of his own species—a caricature with
more than a grain of truth when applied
to the wildlife lovers who dominate the en-
vironmental movement in more than one
country. As 'prophets of doom', ecologists
are further accused of downplaying
human ingenuity and stifling human initi-
ative. Socialists also take issue with the
ecologists' uncritical acceptance of
Malthusian dogma—pointing out that
unequal distribution of resources and the
dynamic of capitalist expansion, rather
than the 'tragedy of the commons' (a
euphemism for population growth) bet-
ter explain the patterns and processes of
environmental degradation.
Both these views are caricatures, but
like most stereotypes, they build upon a
solid core of truth. It is true that orthodox
socialists still regard environmentalism as
a western fad, an upper class deviation
from the class struggle (note the indif-
ference, bordering on hostility, with which
the Indian communist parties treat ecolo-
gical concerns). At the same time, many
environmentalists (especially in the United
States) are largely indifferent to the plight
of the underprivileged in their own society
let alone the continuing impoverishment
of the third world. Be that as it may, there
have always existed socialist currents
which are not anti-ecological in any funda-
mental sense; within Marxism, 'humanists'
who try and rescue the early Marx from
his later 'scientific' self, and outside
Marxism, the communitarian, agrarian,
and anarchist trends in the socialist tradi-
tion. Nor must one equate the World
Wildlife Fund with the environmental
Economic and Political Weekly December 3, 1988
Greens, for example, have embraced en-
vironmentalism without fully losing their
socialist moorings. Moreover, to the tradi-
tional socialist concern with equality
across classes, sexes, and nations, the
ecological movement has added a new, but
equally important category—equality
across generations. (Of course, intergene-
rational equity,' though not always in-
tragenerational equity, was practised by
many non-industrial cultures with tradi-
tions of prudent resource use.)
Nonetheless, the ecologists' stereotype
of the socialist (and vice versa) presents
a formidable hurdle to those of us who
hold environmentalism and socialism to
be (along with feminism) among the most
compelling movements of the age. This ar-
ticle is a modest attempt towards the rap-
prochement between the two traditions.
While keeping in mind similar attempts
in Europe towards defining an 'ecological
socialism' (Bahro 1984; Martinez-Alier
1987), it is firmly rooted in the Indian ex-
perience. After defining five generic posi-
tions in the environment-development
debate in the next section, I go on to
analyse three important ideological trends
in the Indian environmental movement.
The final section argues that this ideo-
logical plurality is (at least in the short
term) wholly to be welcomed.
My treatment rests on two core assump-
tions, which are elaborated more fully
elsewhere (cf Agarwal and Narain 1985;
Hays 1987). The first, contra the socialists,
is that environmental degradation is by no
means restricted to the industrialised
world; in fact, its consequences are more
serious in the third world, where it affects
the livelihood and survival of hundreds of
millions of poor peasants, tribals, and
slum-dwellers. Hence a cross-cultural
dialogue must begin with this recognition;
that third world environmentalism is
qualitatively different, in its origins and
emphases, from its Western counterpart.
One is an environmentalism of survival
and subsistence; the other of access to a
clean and beautiful environment for the
enhancement of the 'quality of life'. The
second assumption, contra the ecologists,
is that classical socialist concerns with
equity and justice remain as valid as ever
before: in fact, economic and political
redistribution appears to be a sine qua
non of environmental stability.
II
Utopians, Dystopians and
Communitarians
As the Reaganite and Thatcherite
counterrevolutions (not to speak of the
 fascination for economic liberalisation in
this country) make painfully evident, the
vision of socialism is compelling to
socialists, not always to the general public
Since the middle of the last century,
socialists have had to contend with two
views of the human predicament that have
exercised an equal, if not greater, influence
on the modern consciousness.
We have, firstly, the Utopian worldview
of modern economics. In economic
theory, society is composed of an aggre-
gate of individuals, each of whom is com-
mitted firmly to his/her own material ad-
vancement, We live in an intensely com-
petitive world, in which human nature is
revealed to be irremediably selfish. This
vision of utility maximising economic
agents, it might be added, is univer-
salistic—it makes little allowance for
cultural or historical variations. Surpris-
ingly, what redeems this world of indivi-
dual selfishness is a social institution—
the market. It is the invisible hand which
miraculously transforms a welter of com-
petitive and conflicting individual actions
into the best of all possible worlds. So
long as we leave economic decisions to the
market, the argument runs, we can look
forward to a secular (or monotonic, to use
the economists' jargon) increase in human
welfare. This buoyant view of the human
prospect rests on two central, and com-
plementary, assumptions—of an infinitely
expanding technological frontier and the
rejection of any physical limits to
economic growth.
Historically at odds with the econo-
mists' buoyancy is the profoundly pessi-
mistic, or dystopian, vision of the biolo-
gists. Ironically, biologists also practise
methodological individualism, promoting
with equal passion a view of human
nature as essentially selfish. Only in this
case, individuals are believed to maximise
not their utility, but their 'inclusive
fitness', the prospects of survival for the
concerned individual and his closest
relatives. Unlike the economists, however,
biologists have no correcting mechanism
to fall back upon. When coupled with an
awareness of the physical limits to growth,
their perspective on human selfishness can
only forecast doom, as a n expanding
human population exceeds the 'carrying
capacity' of their habitat. From Malthus
through Darwin to the Club of Rome,
there is a long line of doomsday prophets,
who believe the conflict between indi-
vidual and social rationality does not
admit of any solution.
Not surprisingly, these two philosophies
have historically held sway in the capitalist
west—they are observed in their purest
form in that apogee of competitive indi-
vidualism, the United States of America
(cf Bella' et a11985; Hofstadter 1960). Yet
Economic and Political Weekly December 3, 1988
they d o have a powerful influence over
large sections of the intellectual and
political elite in the third world However,
these two ideologies serve us only as a
point of departure—our concern is with
the large middle ground they have left un-
colonised, which is occupied by social
philosophies whose defining feature, as
far as we are concerned, is that they do
not view human nature as essentially
selfish. On the contrary, for these
philosophies the construction of com -
munity (and by extension, the de-empha-
sising of individualism) becomes an over-
riding concern.
There are three generic types of 'com-
munitarian' ideologies. The first, which
Marxists dismiss as 'idealist", holds that
the construction of community can only
come about through the affirmation of
shared spiritual values. Idealists deplore
the loss of meaning and desacralising of
life in contemporary society, calling for a
return to the religious and ethical tradi-
tions of the premodern world. In the en-
vironmental field, this trend is represented
by the likes of Lynn White and Theodore
Roszak, who seek to replace a modern
ethic of domination with a religion, draw-
ing from earlier traditions, which preaches
harmony with nature. It must be noted
that this philosophy is not always
socialist—indeed, the tenacious defence of
hierarchy as 'natural' for 'functional' for
the society) by some of its adherents is
uncomfortably close to sociobiology (cf
Passmore 1980).
Diametrically opposed to the idealists
are the Marxists. Their diagnosis of the
modern predicament runs on strictly
'materialist' lines; here it is the unequal
distribution of resources, caused by con-
centration of the means of production in
the hands of the ruling capitalist class,
which leads to human deprivation. In this
perspective, the market, far from being a
rational allocator of resources (as in the
neoclassical vision) reinforces existing in-
equalities. Moreover, by treating nature as
a free good, the market encourages en-
vironmental degradation through the pur-
suit of profit. The abolition of private
ownership of the means of production,
and the replacement of the market by
centralised economic planning, are the
preconditions for a just, and ecologically
stable, society. Marxists do believe in the
forging of social bonds—only, they hold
the state and the vanguard party to be the
ultimate guarantor of community.
, The third variant of communitarianism
cannot be defined as precisely. It is, as it
were, a philosophy in the making, an
eclectic. brew drawing selectively upon
anarchism, agrarianism and other non-
Marxist socialist traditions. For want of
a better label, we may call it 'decentralised
socialism' (Martinez Alier (1987) prefers
'ecological neo-narodnism'). It shares the
idealists' suspicions of the modern state
and the exaggerated claims of modern
technology, while it is at one with the
Marxists in their opposition to hierarchy.
While it draws heavily on Marxist cate-
gories in its analysis of capitalist and
colonial expansion and their impact on
the natural environment, in its programme
of social reconstruction it radically
departs from Marxism. As institutions
embodying the concentration of power,
the party and state are antithetical to the
building of socialist values. The construc-
tion of community must begin from the
bottom up, through what the prince
a m o n g socialists, Kropotkin, called
'mutual aid'.
III
Three Worlds of Indian
Environmentalism
How do these generic strands resonate
within the Indian environmental move-
ment? Here it is useful to distinguish bet-
ween the social base of the environmental
movement and its articulate leadership, or
between what one might call the 'private'
and 'public' faces of environmentalism (cf
Guha 1989). I n fact, a large segment of
what presently passes for the environmen-
tal movement is a peasant movement
draped in the cloth of environmentalism.
Thus a number of local initiatives in
defence of traditional rights in land, water,
forests and other living resources collec-
tively constitute what sympathetic intellec-
tuals have termed the 'environmental'
movement.
The conflicts which these movements
symbolise are not (as in the western case)
about 'productive' versus 'protective' uses
of the environment, but about alternate
productive uses For example, commercial
forestry, large dams and fishing by
trawlers all represent intensive and profit-
oriented modes of resource use which are
threatening the ecological and social
viability of traditional, subsistence-
oriented uses of those very resources. In
the last decade and a half, such conflicts
have given rise to a number of local in-
itiatives in defence of traditional rights,
which intellectuals argue can be read as
a devastating indictment of the resource
illiteracy of development planning since
independence. Underlining the close links
between impoverishment of the resource
base and impoverishment of large sections
of the population, the more vocal segment
of the movement (the Environmentalists',
properly so called) has called for a com-
plete overhaul of the present economic
development strategy, and its replacement
2579
 with a more ecologically conscious (and ving, l a b o u r intensive, and socially self-reliance, and environmental stability.
socially liberating) path of development. liberating technologies. Their emphasis is As for the scale of activism, this last
While there is widespread agreement not so much on challenging the 'system' strand works at a micro level (normally
within the movement as regards the failure (or the system's ideological underpinn- a group of villages) in demonstrating the
of the present development model, there ings), a i in demonstrating in practice a set viability of an alternate strategy of
is no consensus onlikely alternatives. Here of technological and socialalternatives to economic development (while this com-
I believe that one can see the emergence the present model of urban-industrial mitment to grassroots work is commen-
of three distinct ideological perspectives development (cf Reddy 1982; Agarwal dable, it must be said that some Appro-
within the Indian environmental move- 198,6). priate Technologists have not only acted
ment, each resting on a different identi- The third and most eclectic strand em- locally, but thought locally too)/ Most
fication of the genesis of the problem and braces a variety of groups who have ar- PSMs cast a somewhat wider net, perhaps
articulating rather different mechanisms rived at environmentalism only after a working at the level of the district, and
of redressal. This identification is however protracted engagement with conventional occasionally ( as in the case of the KSSP)
not exhaustive, but indicative. It is entirely political philosophies, notably Marxism. the state. The Gandhians have the largest
possible that none of these ideologies is While including elements of the Naxalite reach, carrying their crusade across the
present in a particular struggle, or thai movement and radical Christian groups, country and indeed across the globe.
adherents of all three might participate Ecological Marxists are perhaps most Finally, the three strands also differ in
unitedly in a specific local initiative. closely identified with the Peoples Sciencc their preferred sectors of activism. Their
However, careful study and interaction Movements (for example, the Kerala rural romanticism has led the Gandhians
with groups spread all over the country Sastra Sahirya Parishad), whose initial to exclusively emphasise agrarian en-
does seem to suggest that the three strands concern with 'taking science to the peo- vironmental problems, a preference rein-
identified below' are the most represen- ple' has widened to include environmen- forced by their well known hostility to
tative tendencies within the movement as tal protection. The PSMs can be distin- modern industry. While Appropriate
a whole. What follows is by no means a guished from the Gandhian elements in Technologists do recognise that some
history of the Indian environmental move- two major ways: in their unremitting degree of industrialisation is inevitable
ment, but a preliminary characterisation hostility to tradition, and in the relative- (though not of the present energy-inten-
of these three ideological strands. ly greater emphasis on confrontational sive kind) in practice they have worked
The first strand, which we may call movements. Although such groups have largely on technologies aimed at liberating
Crusading Gandhian, relies heavily on a spent a great deal of effort in spreading work on the farm. As a consequence both
religious idiom in its rejection of the the message of Marxism among the strands have seriously neglected urban and
modern way of life. It upholds the pre- masses, in general they abhor constructive industrial environmental problems, whose
capitalist and precolonial village com- work. The fashioning of ecologically impact on the life and livelihood of poor
munity as the exemplar of ecological and sound technological alternatives, they Indians is scarcely less important. Here
social harmony: Gandhi's invocation of believe, must await the victory of the Ecological Marxists, with their natural
Ram Rajya being taken literally, rather socialism. Here systemic economic change constituency among miners and workers,
than metaphorically. The methods of ac- is viewed as logically prior to ecological have been more alert to questions of in-
tion favoured by this group are squarely stability, and political action towards that dustrial pollution and work safety.
in the Gandhian tradition—or at least of end becomes an overriding priority (cf While Crusading Gandhiar>, Appro-
one interpretation of that tradition—fasts, KSSP 1984). priate Technologists and Ecological Marx-
padayairas, and poojas, in which a tradi- These contrasting perspectives may be ists represent the three most forceful
tional cultural idiom is used to further the further clarified by examining each strands in the environment-development
strictly modern cause of environmen- strand's attitudes towards socialism and debate in this country, two additional
talism. Crusading Gandhians are concern- science, as well as their style and scale of points of view should be briefly mention-
ed above all with the stranglehold of activism. Most Crusading Gandhians re- ed. One looks to protect the environment
modernist philosophies (rationalism, ject socialism as a western concept. Some while excluding development from its
economic growth) on the Indian intelli- among them gloss over inequalities in horizons—this is the wildlife protection
gentsia; through the written and spoken traditional Indian society, others even at- movement, votaries of which have tend-
word, they propagate an alternative, non- tempt to justify them. Clearly the Marx- ed to value certain animal species (for ex-
modern philosophy whose roots lie in In- ists are the most consistent in their attacks ample, the tiger) higher than the less
dian tradition (cf Nandy 1987; Bahuguna on hierarchy. The Appropriate Techno- privileged members of their own species.
1983). logists, for their part, while sufficiently In fact, many wildlife lovers adhere to a
The second strand can be termed, less ifluenced by Marxism so as not to wish Malthusian interpretation in which the
controversially, as Appropriate away the problem, have rarely shown the high birth rates of the poor (especially the
Technology. Less strident in its opposition will to challenge inequality through a pro- rural poor) are held to be the main cause
to industrial society, it strives for a work- cess of struggle. Attitudes towards modern of environmental degradation. Then we
ing synthesis of agriculture and industry, science also vary widely. The Gandhians have the incurable optimists, who view
big and small units, and western and consider science to be a brick in the edifice development' in isolation from the en-
eastern (or. modern and traditional) of industrial society responsible for some vironment, in the naive belief that there
technolbgical traditions. Both in its am- of its worst excesses. Marxists yield to no are no physical limits to economic growth
bivalence about religion and in its un- one in their admiration, even worship, of and that rapid industrialisation on the
equivocal criticisms of hierarchy in modern science and technology, viewing western model can be brought about in
modern and traditional society, it is science and the 'scientific temper' as an a matter of decades. While Indian econo-
markedly influenced by western socialism. indispensable ally in the construction of mists do not always practise methodo-
In its emphasis on constructive work, it a new social order. Here the Appropriate logical individualism, and many hold the
also taps a somewhat different vein in the Technologists are the most pragmatic, state rather than the market to be the most
Gandhian tradition. Appropriate Techno- arguing for a judicious mix of traditional efficient allocator of resources, they are
logists have done pioneering work in theand modern knowledge (and technique) by and large as innocent of ecological con-
to fulfil the needs of social justice, local
creation and diffusion of resource conser- cerns as their 'neo-classical' counterparts

Economic and Political Weekly December 3, 1988

 and as admiring of energy-intensive
growth paths (Singh 1978; Nadkarni
1987).
IV
A Hundred Flowers?
The emergence of the Indian en-
vironmental movement can perhaps be
dated to 1973, the year the Chipko move-
ment began. Given its relatively brief
history, it has enjoyed considerable suc-
cess. The movement has forced the state
to acknowledge the inseparable links bet-
ween economic wellbeing and environ-
mental sustainability, while the exponen-
tial coverage of ecological issues in the
media (printed and visual, English and
regional language) can only be a source
of statisfaction. So must be the prolifera-
tion of voluntary groups working in the
field of environmental action and eco-
restoration. Perhaps the greatest failure
has been the lack of response from poli-
tical parties, especially those an the left.
Yet there is little room for complacen-
cy. Take for instance three of the move-
ment's most trumpeted successes—
Chipko, Bedthi and Silent Valley. A closer
look reveals that these victories were all
made possible only through a unique
combination of factors, Chipko's success
is clearly related to its place of origin.
Emerging in an area of great cultural-
religious significance for the majority of
the country's population, and led by
Gandhians with close links to the ruling
party, it was able to force the hands of the
state. The opposition to the Bedthi dam
was led by rich and influential horticul-
turists, who counted among their sup-
porters and castemen the last chief
minister of Karnataka. As for Silent
Valley, the late prime minister's desire to
carve a niche for herself in the interna-
tional environmental community (and the
influence of prominent individuals such
as Salim Ali) played no mean part in the
final decision to scrap the project. Chipko
notwithstanding, commercial forestry
continues its march of destruction else-
where in the subcontinent, while the
reverses in Silent Valley and Bedthi have
scarcely deterred the unholy trinity of
engineers, contractors and civil servants
from' realising their dream of turning
India into the most dammed country on
earth.
The celebration of small victories
should not, therefore, blind us to the
larger defeats. Assuredly, things can only
get worse before they begin to get better.
There are three solid reasons why economic
growth in India will continue to use
resources both wastefully and unsus-
tainably. T h e economic system of
capitalism is inherently expansionist;
Economic and Political Weekly December 3, 1988
fuelled by narrow criteria of profitability,
it is completely insensitive to the questions
of relative factor endowments and ecolo-
gical stability. Ideologically, this wasteful
and destructive economic system is but-
tressed by the seductive hold of moder-
nisation theory on the minds of our elite.
Our present political system is hardly
equipped to serve environmental ends
either. Five years (the time horizons of our
most enlightened politicians) is too short
a period for ecological reconstruction.
Moreover, the links between big business
and the state, and the centralising tenden-
cies in the present constitutional set-up,
further shrink the space for dissent and
debate.
In the circumstances, the environmental
opposition must simultaneously operate
on three flanks. In the sphere of the
economy, it must strengthen the work of
the Appropriate Technologists in presen-
ting before the public a set of resource
conserving a n d socially liberating
technical alternatives. In the 'realm of
ideas, it must draw upon the compelling
arguments of the Gandhians in high-
lighting the cultural and spiritual costs of
much of what today passes for economic
'development'. And in its political strug-
gles, it can do worse than invoke the long
and valuable experience of left groups in
forging bonds of solidarity among those
most seriously affected by environmental
degradation.
Notwithstanding the shrill sectarian
cries of the most vocal in the three trends,
therefore, I believe that this ideological
plurality in the Indian environmental
movement is to be welcomed. Actually, the
three contending ideologies are exercising
a visible (though not always acknowledg-
ed) influence on each other. Thus the
relentless critique of the Gandhians has
made some PSM groups more guarded in
their celebration of modern science, while
the incisive Marxian analyses of class ex-
ploitation have forced at least a few
Gandhians to be more sensitive to the
fractures within their own tradition.
Among the three trends I have identified,
the Appropriate Technologists can be seen
as occupying the slippery and ever shifting
middle ground. However, both Crusading
Gandhians and Ecological Marxists are
playing a critical role in widening the
horizons of the movement and sharpening
the terms of debate. These two tendencies,
too easily dismissed as ideological and
political 'extremists' respectively, are, as
it were, creating a public space for the
activities of the Appropriate Technology
strand. In the formulation of an ex-
peasant who at times wasn't that far from
being an ecological socialist himself, let
a hundred flowers bloom!
[An earlier draft of this paper was presented
at seminars organised by the Institute for
Cultural Research and Action and the Centre
for Socialist Studies in Bangalore in August
1988. I am grateful to the participants in both
seminars for helpful comments. The usual
disclaimers apply.]
References
Agarwal, Anil and Narain, Sunita, editors,
1985. India: The State of the Environment
1984-85: A Citizens Report. New Delhi,
Centre for Science and Environment.
Agarwal, Anil, 1986. 'Human-Nature Interac-
tions in a Third World Country', The
Environmentalist, Vol 6, No 2.
Bahro, Rudolf, 1984. From Red to Green: In-
terviews with New Left Review, London,
Verso Books.
Bahuguna, Sunderlal, 1983. Walking with the
Chipko Message, Navjivan Ashram, Silyara
(Tehri Garhwal).
Bellah, Robert et al, 1985. Habits of the Heart:
Individualism and Commitment in
American Life. Berkeley, University of
California Press.
Capra, Fritjof and Spretnak, Charlene, 1984.
The German Greens, New York, EP
Dutton.
Guha, Ramachandra, 1989. The Unquiet
Woods: Ecological Change and Peasant
Resistance in the Indian Himalaya, New
Delhi, Oxford University Press (forth-
coming).
Hays, Samuel, 1987. Beauty, Health and Per-
manence: Environmental Politics in the
United States, 1955-85, New York, Cam-
bridge University Press.
Hofstadter, Richard, 1960 [1944], Social Dar-
winism in American Thought, Boston,
Beacon Press.
KSSP, 1984. Science as Social Activism, Trivan-
drum, Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad.
Martinez-Alier, Juan, 1987. Ecological
Economics, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
Nadkarni, M V, 1987. Agricultural Develop-
ment and Ecology: An Economist's View,
Indian Journal .of Agricultural Economics,
Vol 42, No 3.
Nandy, Ashis, 1987. Traditions, Tyrannies and
Utopias, New Delhi, Oxford University
Press.
Passmore, John, 1980. Man's Responsibility for
Natures London, Duckworth.
Porrit, Jonathan, 1984. Seeing Green: The
Politics of Ecology Explained, Oxford, Basil
Blackwell.
Reddy, A K N, 1982. An Alternate Pattern of
Indian Industrialisation', in A K Bagchi and
Nirmala Bannerjee, editors, Change and
Choice in Indian Industry, Calcuta,
K P Bagchi.
Singh, Narindar, 1978. Economics and the
Crisis of Ecology, New Delhi, Oxford
University Press.
2581