Panel No. 15

Panel Title: From Landscapes to Genomes: Authoritative Knowledge in Contested Domains

Convenor: Stig Toft Madsen, Associate Professor, International Development Studies, Roskilde University, Denmark

    Thursday 8 July, 13–18

Panel Abstract: According to one standard narrative of science, authoritative knowledge of nature from landscapes to genomes resides in, and is generated by, universities and similar centres of learning and research, both public and private. While such institutions may not claim a monopoly on the right to generate knowledge, they have historically increased their share of the knowledge generated, patented, applied and administered in the public sphere.
In South Asia, the established body of knowledge relating to forest management and the conservation of wildlife came under concerted attacks in the 1980s onwards, while agricultural knowledge remained a less contested domain. In the last few years, however, the advances in biotechnology have turned the focus back on agriculture, where controversies about transgenic “terminator seeds” came to rival in intensity earlier disputes regarding the benefits and danger of canals and dams. Genetically modified food is now on its way into South Asia. Whether or not GMOs are considered safe depends on which science one endorses and consumes.
Academic positions on the role of science in the creation of authoritative knowledge range from Meera Nanda’s pro-science radicalism to Dipesh Chakrabarty’s dismissal of the scientific “dialect” of truth. It would be interesting to take stock of the present situation by considering papers that analyse how authoritative knowledge is created about such imponderables as genes – or atoms. Who is the God of the really small things?

The panel is a “transatlantically modified version” of a roundtable discussion called Knowledge, Nature, Power and States: From Landscapes to Genomes in South Asia held at the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association of Asian Studies, San Diego 4–7 March 2004, and arranged by Ronald Herring and K Sivaramakrishnan (see Panel Number 128 at http://www.aasianst.org/).

Papers accepted for presentation in the panel:

Paper Giver 1: Ronald J Herring, Department of Government, Cornell University, USA

Paper 1 Title: Continuities Across Domains of Landscapes and Genomes in Public Goods Discourse

Paper Abstract: The purpose of this panel is to investigate the intersection of cultural logics and political economy in defining and attaining human collective interests in nature. Any understanding of public goods in nature is impoverished unless it takes into account this intersection of cultural logics and political economy. That is, goods and bads in nature are of necessity embedded in a normative logic that is culturally anchored but demonstrably fluid. Likewise, there are inevitably interests at play, but these are by no means fixed: if nothing else, science continually presents new challenges to the way interests are understood by citizens. For global processes impinging on citizens, consider the sea change introduced by the atmospheric science of ozone holes and global warming. Transgenic organisms represent a particularly interesting illustration of these dynamics. The paper will discuss the politics of transnational science, junk science, and "Western" science: why do some configurations of knowledge claims win politically while others lose?

      Full paper to be downloaded (as a pdf-file)

Paper Giver 2: Bengt G. Karlsson. Department of Cultural Anthropology & Ethnology, Uppsala University, Sweden

Paper 2 Title: Knowing Nature from Above: Satellite imagery, land cover change, and community resource management in India

Paper Abstract: In this paper I will discuss the political and epistemological consequences of present day usage of remote sensing in assessments of land-cover change; taking the example of forest cover assessments. Satellite imagery has become a major tool for monitoring the environment, and it is quite common that satellite data is quoted as the basis for policy decisions regarding management of natural resources. In the international debate, satellite remote sensing is also presented as a powerful vehicle for achieving sustainable development as well as for effective community resource management. India has a well-developed remote sensing infrastructure and the government is motivating the large investments in satellite technology because of its “developmental applications”. In view of this, it appears critical to interrogate what this turn towards privileging knowledge about nature from above implies in terms of power and control over valuable resources like the forest. It can, for example, be argued that knowledge about nature grounded in people’s lived experience of inhabiting the land might be on the losing end.

Paper Giver 3: Peter Andersen, Department of Geography , University of Bergen, Norway

Paper 3 Title: Frankenfood or good stuff? Micronutrient rich staple crops for Asia

Paper Abstract: New crop varieties are developed in Asia as new steps are taken in the Green Revolution, and as GM crops gradually are released in large Asian countries such as China and India. Although many of these developments are intended to be pro-poor and environmentally friendly, they are fiercely refused by environmental organisations.
Different strategies are applied. Some strategies aim at produce GM varieties that are tolerant to weedicides such as glycosate. Other strategies aim at develop crops producing toxins that are fighting major pests, such as the bollworm tolerant Bt cotton, leading to reduced need for pesticides. ‘Golden rice’, a GM variety of rice which synthesises vitamin A, and high protein potatoes are examples of strategies aiming at improving the nutrient content in staple crops.
The development of micro-nutrient dense staple crops rich in iron and zinc are other examples of attempts to develop crops that aim at improving the nutrition of the poor. This strategy is applied by the CGIAR programme Strategies for Improving Availability of Micronutrients, headed by IFPRI, and is discussed in detail in the paper. It is concluded that the strategy may be an important contribution to the problems it is seeking to solve, but that it should be seen as one of several complementary strategies in reducing micronutrient deficiencies.

      Full paper to be downloaded (as a pdf-file)

Paper Giver 4: Stig Toft Madsen, International Development Studies, Roskilde University, Denmark

Paper 4 Title: Revolution by Stealth?

Paper Abstract: Technologies for the genetic modification of seeds (such as food grain, cotton, etc) have mostly been developed in the US. In India, there has been a major debate about whether or not to allow Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) into Indian agriculture at all. While research has been conducted on GMOs, commercialization has been delayed or prevented until the last two years or so. The legalization of GMOs occurred after Bt Cotton was illegally commercialized.
This paper intends to take a look at the institutional landscape into which GMOs are now being introduced, taking its point of departure in the Ministry of Agriculture in Delhi. Secondly, the paper will recount how Indian farmers organizations have respectively opposed and promoted the introduction of GMOs. Particular attention will be given to the KRRS in Karnataka led by MD Nanjundaswamy and the Shetkari Sangathana in Maharashtra led by Sharad Joshi.
While the Green Revolution spread surprisingly fast over vast parts of the sub-continent after the mid-1960s, the possible future expansion of GMOs may take many years. The Green Revolution was heralded with my much fanfare. The current change seems to be a Silent Revolution, or a Revolution by Stealth.

Paper Giver 5: Rajeswari S. Raina, NISTADS, New Delhi

Paper 5 Title: Agricultural Biotechnology- Opportunities for learning from the history of agricultural knowledge systems

Paper Abstract: This paper argues that the State-industry-university network in agricultural biotechnology must learn a few lessons from the history of the agricultural sciences before it goes further with planning and investing in ag-biotech. Two of the key institutions (habits of thought/ rules/ norms) that prevailed over the green revolution economics, politics and science, are increasingly being questioned. These institutions are (i) the linear hierarchy of agricultural knowledge generation and utilization; (ii) the supply side rhetoric of population - maintenance research. Biotechnology is a useful technical instrument that can and must be integrated within a framework of ‘problems confronting agriculture and its knowledge system.’ But can the existing organizations of agricultural science, gagged by norms of hierarchies, selective perception, reductionism, and hard science cultures marked by disregard for the social sciences, driven by a bureaucratic problem solving zeal that does not provide any scope to understand the ‘problem,’ an incestuous science-State/patronage relationship and an unwillingness to partner on equal terms with the farming communities, ever understand its own knowledge system?
Among the sciences, the agricultural sciences have been the least informed by and concerned about learning from its own history. Several scholars have lamented the lack of interest in the evolution and contextualization of agricultural knowledge. Yet some contemporary history of agricultural knowledge help us understand why agricultural science ‘does what it does.’ For instance several scholars contend that institutional innovations, especially the political commitment to these innovations, were as important as the technological innovations in enabling the green revolution. These institutions/norms shape the response of agricultural science to ecological and social issues in agriculture.
The paper presents an institutional economics analytical framework that explains the multiple ways, means and interests that lead to institutional innovations. It highlights the politics of the institutional innovations that were effected in the 1960s in India and prevail till date, mostly as rigid institutional arrangements, especially in public sector research policies and organizations. Two examples, of maintenance research and social science research are used to illustrate these institutional arrangements. Indian agricultural science always seeks legitimacy from the bureaucracy instead of seeking the same from its farming population, consumers and politicians. Given the power and scientific excitement of biotechnology, this trend is dangerous and must be altered. Agricultural science with the help of a pro-active and accountable social science, must learn to reflect upon and re-design its institutional arrangements.
Drawing from the history of the agricultural sciences in India, the paper argues that political foresight and willingness are necessary to bring about institutional innovations in the agricultural knowledge system. A politically astute and historically informed ag-biotech innovation system is necessary in India.

Paper Giver 6: Krishna Karkee, Lund University International Master’s Programme in Environmental Science (LUMES), Lund University, Sweden

Paper 6 Title: Land Degradation in Nepal: A Menace to Economy and Ecosystems

Paper Abstract: Land degradation is one of the greatest challenges facing mankind and Nepal is no exception. Anthropogenic causes such as deforestation, excessive use of chemical fertilizers, overgrazing, construction works and unscientific farming in the hills have resulted in the loss in the flora and fauna, erosion of top soil, occurrence of land slides in the hills and flooding in the plain areas. This has led to severe environmental degradation leading to poor socio-economic condition and disruption of natural ecosystems in Nepal. In this paper the aspects related to land degradation, extent and severity of damages and causes and consequences of land degradation are discussed. Various measures for restoration of degraded lands undergoing in Nepal have also been explained. The empirical study reveals that the rate of degradation outweighs the restoration processes.

      Full paper to be downloaded (as a pdf-file)

Paper Giver 7: Sidsel Hansson, Centre for East and Southeast Asian Studies, Lund University, Sweden

Paper 7 Title: Re-inventing landscapes and women’s rights in an environmental risk area in northwest India

Paper Abstract: In this paper I discuss the ways in which women’s rights and roles are impacted by the ongoing redefinitions of nature in an environmental risk area in northwest India. In this area (Alwar, Rajasthan) the main environmental actors are local NGOs working outside local state structures and with support from donor agencies and neo-Gandhian institutions. It remains crucial for these NGOs that their initiatives and reinventions are seen as legitimate both by local populations and external supporters. Accordingly, the NGOs are involved in a constant negotiation of divergent views on rights and natural resource management. A primary tool for the NGO-led environmental strategy is the reinvention of local, traditional ways of conserving natural resources and shaping landscapes. While the donor agency policies in this specific case are not in conflict with the neo-Gandhian “return to traditional knowledge and usage of landscapes”, their divergent positions become apparent when the question of women’s rights is taken into consideration. This paper mainly focuses on the efforts made by a local NGO to accommodate the divergent discourses on gender, tradition and landscapes. With reference to the Alwar case, my argument is that this process of reconstruction of the local landscapes seems to open up arenas for women’s re-negotiation of their access to resources and civil society agency.

Paper Giver 8: Meera Nanda, Hartford, USA

Paper 8 Title: Dharmic Ecology and the Neo-Pagan International: The Dangers of Religious Environmentalism in India

Paper Abstract: Nearly all major environmentalist movements in India in recent years – including Chipko, Narmada Bachao Andolan and to some extent, the movement against genetically modified crops – have invoked Hindu religious motifs and rituals in order to mobilize the masses. Environmentalism in India, in other words, has self-consciously invoked the traditional Hindu conception of sacredness of nature as a strategic resource for mass mobilization.
This paper will question the usefulness of religious environmentalism both from political and ecological perspectives.
Politically, this paper will show the overlap between the left-wing environmentalist uses of religious motifs and the rightwing, Hindutva’s claims of the superior ecological wisdom of Hindu traditions. The Chipko movement will be used as a case study. Furthermore, the connections between the Sangh parivar’s reading of dharmic ecology and neo-pagan groups in Europe will be established.
On the ecological front, this paper will present evidence showing that sacredness of nature does not necessarily lead to ecological ethics.
A secular and class-based environmental activism will be defended.

      Full paper to be downloaded (as a pdf-file)

Major Gods and Minor Deities of Science anno 2004:

Summing up and Discussion: K. Sivaramakrishnan, Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, USA