Minutes of National Conclave on ENERGY and CLIMATE CHANGE
---------------------------------------------------------
Date: 26-27 March, 2011
Venue : Centre for Youth & Social Development, Institutional Area, Bhubaneshwar
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The conclave was organized under the banner of FOCUS ODISHA in collaboration with GREENPEACE,Centre for Education and Documentation(CED),Knowelge for Civil Society,Odisha Development Action Forum(ODAF), United Artists Association(UAA)along with few other organisations ;in the context of multiple crises in Power sector, and consequent issues of Climate Change and welfare of the masses. The conclave was probably the first of its kind in our country to discuss and determine a sustainable path to meet the energy needs of our society. More than 100 participants from various walks of life such as politicians, business leaders, entrepreneurs, environmental and energy experts, bureaucrats and civil society organizations attended this event.
The agenda for the meet was as in Annexure - 1.
The inauguration session was preceded by registration of the participants. List of participants is as in
Annexure - 2.
Though the original objective of the conclave was to bring together individuals, NGOs and other civil society organizations working on all aspects of energy on a single forum, due to lack of resources and time the deliberations in the conclave were largely restricted to issues surrounding the Power sector. In view of the huge deleterious impacts of conventional electricity generating plants on the social, economic and environmental aspects of our society, the sense of the meet was that issues surrounding electricity should be addressed as a top priority for the forum. The other forms of energy sources in our country should be addresses as when the opportunity arises or as a separate exercise in parallel to this electricity sector. Hence the main objective which emerged was to deliberate on major issues relating to electrical power scenario in India and to build a pressure group with grass roots backing to bring about necessary change in Government policy in formulating an integrated energy policy which is people centric, inclusive, environmentally sustainable, economically viable and congruent with the National Action Plan on Climate change. Within the framework of this broader objective, various panel discussions were oriented towards conventional forms of electricity generation, large scale and decentralized renewable electricity options, demand side management, equitable access and delivery systems. Besides these, the conclave was successful in agreeing to create a national level forum where various policy level issues on energy in general, and on power sector in particular, could be deliberated on, and suitable course corrections can be recommended to the government. It was decided to take up, on a continuing basis, the various issues in Power sector by clearly identifying relevant stakeholders, effectively lobbying and campaigning with Government institutions, suitably educating the masses, firmly bridging the gap between authorities and people; and rendering all possible technical and moral support to peoples’ movement on energy issues. A co-ordination committee to at the national level and four working groups were formed to take the relevant issues forward. The meeting ended with the hope that this forum will become a credible platform for all NGOs and individuals concerned with energy related issues to enable us to successfully lobby with the govt. to adapt a people centric energy policy.
Brief of various proceedings:
Day 1: Morning Session -10 am to 1 pm
Session 1
Panelists:
Facilitator: Walter Mendoza, Executive Director, Centre for Education and Documentation, Bangalore,
(i) Sri. Jagadananda, eminent social activist and RTI Commissioner of Odisha;
(ii) Sri. Arabinda Behera, Secretary, Department of Environment and Forest, Government of Odisha;
(iii) Sri. Soumya Ranjan Pattanaik, noted journalist and EDITOR-SAMBAD & KANAK TV
Welcome address was provide by Journalist and Convenor of FOCUS ODISHA, Sudarshan Chhotoray who also briefly mentioned the spirit and purpose of the conclave.
Sri. Jagadananda opined the need and urgency of such brainstorming forum in the wake of massive industrialization and associated socio environmental implications on society. He urged for visible demonstration on the ground in terms of raising the societal concerns to much higher levels through public sensitization and massive public education. Simultaneously, he stressed upon the disconnect that exists over issues as well as level of awareness at community end, and also recommended for advocacy and lobby initiatives through effectively using the Right to Information Act.
Sri. Arabinda Behera briefly pointed out the road map and strategy required for tackling the energy and climate change problems. He categorically said “Things have been done in business as usual manner” and “we have really miles to go” and urged for more guidance from intellectuals, scientific community, and civil society organizations.
Sri. Soumya Ranjan Pattanaik expressed concerns over the absence of holistic approach in developmental process and urged for more sustainable approach balancing environment and development.
One participant asked two specific questions of the panelists: (i) what can be done by the RTI Commissioner to ensure availability of all the project related information on the relevant websites without having to resort to specific application under RTI Act; (ii) on what basis has the Orsissa govt. entered into large number of MoUs totaling about 58,000 MW. The response from the panelists was vague, and hence not satisfactory.
Inaugural session was followed by introduction by participants.
The business part of the conclave started with a presentation by Shankar Sharma, power policy analyst, on “Towards a people centric energy policy: a case for reduced need for conventional power plants’’. He presented an over-view of the power sector scenario in the country, and briefly discussed the major issues facing the power sector. He emphasized the fact that despite about 110 times growth in the installed power capacity since independence about 40% of the population is still out of reach of the electricity supply network, whereas the social, economic and environmental problems associated with large conventional power plants are creating havoc, especially on the rural population. He drew the attention of the participants that whereas the burden on society of large conventional power plants is exponentially increasing while the gross inefficiency in the sector is leading to more of such power plants being built. The issues such as urgent need for realistic demand projection, efficiency improvement, demand side management, energy conservation, and widespread deployment of renewable energy sources in a distributed mode were emphasized. Objective costs and benefits analysis of every project along with effective public consultation was strongly advocated. The serious lacunae in the Integrated Energy Policy of the Planning Commission were highlighted, and a people centric electricity policy, along with an alternative model for demand - supply of electricity by 2031-32 was presented. The emphasis was for a paradigm shift in the way our society is looking at electricity demand and supply.
This presentation provided a broad background for further discussions. Lively discussions ensued after the presentation. Issues/concerns over commercial side of power losses in electricity sector, effective ways of demand side management through increasing the price of per unit of energy consumption, low carbon, low impact and high equity path were raised for dealing with the grave problems in the context of India.
Afternoon Sessions: 2 to 5.30 pm
Session 2: 2 to 3 pm
Conventional Energy Options – Coal, Large Hydro, Nuclear, Gas etc
Facilitated by Dr. Bharat Jhunjunwala
This session started with the comments from Dr. Bharat Jhunjhunwala, noted economist, columnist and academician regarding the need and urgency of objectively examining conventional energy options. He pointed out briefly the merits and demerits of coal, large hydro, mini hydro, nuclear and natural gas. He pointed out that natural gas cannot meet the growing demand, nuclear energy production will affect political sovereignty of the nation, and that hydro and mini hydros are equally dangerous in terms of socio and environmental cost. He opined that comparative cost and benefit analysis should be conducted and environmental cost need to be added to the production cost. He emphasized the need to engage in negotiation with government on all related issues, and suggested a broader framework which can effectively steer the local movements on energy issues.
Members actively participated in the ensuing discussions raising many crucial issues of concerns: need for realistic demand for electricity; lack of awareness on socio-environmental impacts on part of people who are projecting excessive the energy requirements; how much energy can be drawn from nature without damaging it permanently; reckless and unscientific energy consumption etc. The experience of Cheemeny power project proposal in Kerala was shared by the activists from in Kerala, and how they have come to the conviction that paradigm shift is necessary from the sustainability and development point of view. There was also a strong opinion by one member against increased pricing to reduce consumption of electricity. The mind set of general public and authorities was quoted as the reason for unrealistic projection of energy requirements.
Session 3: 3 to 4 pm
Large Scale and de-centralised Renewable Energy Options – Wind, Solar, Biomass etc
Facilitated by Preethi Herman, Greenpeace india
Discussion during the session included issues such as: the real need to appreciate the services provided by the energy as opposed to the need for certain quantum of energy alone; the huge scope in the existing electricity infrastructure for meeting the current demand without additional capacity; the huge relevance of decentralized renewable energy sources; the demerits associated with wind turbines (how large wind turbines in Rajasthan are expected to impact the entire monsoon regime in India); how unscientific cultivation of Jatropha can lead to food insecurity; urgent need to focus on enhancing efficiency in end use etc. The session also witnessed discussion on fundamentals of energy sources; the mode of development from Gandhian, to Shumakars Intermediate technology, to market driven approaches for solving the critical issues of energy and climate change; the hurdles involved in meeting all the energy requirements through new & renewable sources; difficulties to power-down the present societal life style. The concept of sustainable development was termed by one participant as oxymoron. There was also a strong suggestion to limit the GDP centred growth.
Session 4: 4 to 5 pm
Demand and Supply, Energy Access and Delivery Systems.
Facilitated by Walter Mendoza, Documentation Centre
Walter mentioned about determining the reasonable demand for power in the context of magnitude of multifarious problems associated with energy. He stressed upon need for ensuring equitable distribution of energy across the society. He highlighted the energy disparities based on in caste, rural and urban populations, and the potential for the use of greener technology for energy production. He identified the need to determine a time frame to move away completely from the conventional power technology; the need to allow both use of conventional and renewable energy in the interregnum; and complete replacement in the long term.
The correlation between energy consumption and human development index was mentioned in the discussion, and the fact that higher per capita energy consumption does not contribute significantly to the human development beyond certain level came out very loud and clear. Participants seem to concur to the suggestion that the energy demands must be determined in terms of needs, wants and luxury. The general belief that Hybrid car is energy efficient was strongly questioned and it was termed as an energy guzzler. There appeared to be a general consensus that decentralization of energy generation/ supply is good, and stressed upon the need to develop methods to limit the centralization of electricity generation.
Participants from Bolangir of Odisha utilized the opportunity under this session to raise the serious socio-environmental issues associated with the proposed coal power plant in Titlagarah by Sahara Company.
Session 5: 7:00- 8:30 pm
Specific 15-minute presentations to supplement the day’s discussions on issues and concerns
Facilitated by Preethi Herman
Day’s proceedings were summarized by Preethi Herman, and small presentations were made on renewable energy sources, and the practical issues on wind energy.
Day 2: Morning Session
Session 6: – 9:00 am- 10:00 am
Lobbying and campaigning at the centre and the states for sustainable energy options
Facilitated by Dr. Bharat Jhunjunwala
Bharat criticized the IEP in terms of its limitation to electricity supply alone, and absence of demand side management.
A strong suggestion was made to raise the public awareness on all the related issues, and to gather wide public opinion before approaching the government for necessary changes. The need for the preparation of comprehensive alternative energy models for each region and state to influence governments was stressed. There was a suggestion to resort to campaigning mode approach in various states and to effectively make use of these nerve centers. The importance of structured lobbying and campaigning, of articulation of major initiatives proposed were highlighted. There was a mention for the need to concentrate on organic synergies and linkages between various energy related movements in the country. The need to focus on the energy saving measures such as use of CFL bulbs and other energy efficient electronic equipments in public institutions, and strengthening people’s movement strategically by undertaking judicial activism and effective harnessing of media were also emphasised.
Session 7: 10 to 11 am
Regional Workshops - issues and responsibilities
Facilitated by Shankar Sharma
Shankar Sharma referred to the need for mobilizing people’s voice on the model for production and supply of electricity in the country and on all the associated issues. He invited the participants to share their views on how this can be achieved effectively and efficiently. The objective of such an exercise should be to develop a process for open learning and inclusiveness; for incorporating community science and peoples knowledge; for broad basing the groups at grass root levels; and developing comprehensive analysis through micro-macro linkages.
Many suggestions were made in this regard. Instead of planning workshops on the basis of geographic regions (such as North, South, East etc. ) the climatic regions such as Deccan plateau, Himalayas, coastal etc. should be considered. There was also a suggestion even to take these consultation processes to state levels. There was a suggestion to focus on the concept of energy Swaraj; to strengthen philosophical foundations through promoting a national vision out of regional experiences; moratorium on all proposed conventional power plants to enable effective debate and consultation.
The session was also used to finalise the draft press conference. The draft was adopted by the conclave after brief discussions and few changes (annexure 3).
Session 8 and 9: 11.30 am to 01.30 pm
a. Working Groups – Policy reviews and proposals, Advocacy action plans
b. Organizational setup, steering group and financing the alliance activities
Facilitated by Preethi Herman and Dr. Bharat Jhunjunwala
These two sessions were combined to optimize the time available.
During the session working groups were unanimously selected through nomination to take the issues forward. The working groups were divided into four thematic domains like Policies, Lobbying and Campaigning, Alternative energy sources, and documenting people’s voice on energy issues. Few members also took the initiative to organize regional conclaves. A co-ordination committee with 6 members was also chosen to co-ordinate the activities of various working groups till the next energy conclave. Details as in Annexure - 4.
The business part of the conclave ended with the vote of thanks by Dr. Bharat Jhunjhunwala, on behalf of the organising committee (of the Bhuvaneshwar meet) comprising of himself, Sudarshan, Preethi, Walter and Shankar. It was mentioned that this organizing committee gets automatically defunct with the conclusion of the conclave, and the new co-ordination committee, which has been chosen will take care of further actions. It was also stressed that the conclave was not meant as a one-off exercise, but is aimed at being a forum for continued activity in bringing about the required changes to the energy policy for the country.
Press Conference: 2 to 3 pm
Press meet was organized to share the outcomes of two days national conclave on energy and climate change. The conference was attended by leading national and local electronic and print media houses. Sudarshan Chottoray lead the interaction with the press. He made the opening remarks that recent nuclear emergency in Japan due to Tsunami has raised many doubts in the mind of common public, and that the nuclear establishments in a less developed nation like India may pose serious threat in future. He also referred to the rampant MoUs signed by Government of Odisha with many private players to establish power plants for generating 58,000 MW of power in future. Even if one third of this gets materialized, quarter of Odisha will be converted into ash dump. He also criticized the lack of coordination and sharp contrast between two Government energy policy documents like NAPCC and IEP.
Preethi Harman, Greenpeace India, said that establishment of the large number of conventional power plants will pose serious implications to natural resources, and impact will be huge logistically, socially and environmentally. She also pointed out that the power requirements are largely extrapolated and for avoiding climate change energy issues should be handled very cautiously.
Shankar Sharma, Power Policy Analyst, briefed the press about the conclave: the serious issues facing electricity sector; the dire need to take cost and benefit analysis into account on a societal basis; and essentiality of a paradigm shift and effective public consultation.
Members of Sahara Power Plant Birodhi Mancha said the proposed power plant at Titlagarah by Sahara will seriously affect the local environment and livelihood base of local denizens.
Odisha Session: 3 pm to 5.30 pm
Facilitated by convener Sudarshan Chottoray
Panelists: (i) Alikeswar Pattanaik, intellectual and leftist;
(ii) Suprano Satpathy, Chairman Smt. Nandini Satapathy Memorial Trust;
(iii) Pradeep Jena, Commissioner - cum –Secretary, Department of IT and Energy, Govt. of Odisha
(iv) Tapan Padhi noted social activist of Odisha.
The meeting started with the question from Balakrushna Sandha of SPBM regarding proposed power plant in Titlagarah of Bolangir district of Odisha. He pointed out that the plant will make the farmers land less and jobless, resulting in distress forced migration. He said the proposed plant will directly affect the livelihoods of people of six villages while causing land, water and air pollution in the locality. Bauribandhu Rout, convener of Odisha Jangal Mancha said that 500 hector of dense forest had been diverted for the purpose of setting Jagannath plant in Talcher which will seriously affect the state of environment in the locality.
Tapan Padhi pointed out the myths of power sector reforms in Odisha. He categorically pointed out that Government has seriously failed to address the energy requirements of people in the rural tracts of the state resulting in low voltage and 8 to 10 hours power cut in a day. He also expressed concerns over monopolistic regime of the state Government, which has invested Rs. 3,000 crores in private players which in turn are not discharging services efficiently. Many concerns were also raised by participants regarding disposal of fly ash, thermal radiation, riverine pollution and water crisis.
Suprano Satapathay opined that Government policies in the context of resettlement and rehabilitation need to be revisited and displacement and multiple displacements is the real problem. From his own experience, he said about the displacement issues in Talcher, how it has pushed the people to mental agony and how it has completely destroyed the social fabrics.
Alikeshwar Pattanaik referred to the model of development. He stressed need for the STATE to follow a different path, and specifically talked about lop- sided development and how benefits of science and development are going to the rich only. He also blamed the capitalistic regime operating in the international arena; especially how Government of Odisha succumbed to pressure in way back in 1993-94, easily considering the norms of World Bank and allowing corporatization in energy sector in the name of power sector reforms. He also pointed out the proposed nuclear plant in Sonapur of Ganjam district of Odisha and urged that Government should work as per the people’s interest, focusing on welfare approach not on trader approach.
Pradeep Jena opined that keeping in mind the growth rate, current state of power shortages and deficits, Odisha needs more energy production, but clearly suggested that the natural resources need to be strategically used. He gave importance to reducing huge transmission loss which is around 40% in Odisha and bringing more efficiency to the system. Regarding solar energy, he said that this may not a viable option as per unit production cost of solar energy is very high around 18 rupees per unit and affordability will be an issue. He talked about the solar PV panels, which in turn governed by amount of insolation; in case of Bolangir it is 18% plant load factor. Since the cost of generation is very high ( 16-18 crore needed for per MW of solar power (though better technology in future can reduce the cost), conventional technology is the only option. He also commented on limitations of small hydro (except the Himalayan region) owing to less channel gradient and rain fed nature of rivers in Orissa.
Regarding the MoUs, he opined that Government of Odisha has signed 29 MoUs with private and Government players. (37,000 MW will be generated by Private players and 21,000 MW by Government agencies like NTPC, OHPC, OPTCL: a total of 58,000 Mega Watts). He also expressed his concerns over disposal of fly ash and said if 50% of MoUs gets materialized about 60 Million tons of ash will be generated (2 million tons per 1,000 Mega watts). These will further exacerbate the ash disposal problems as mine back filling will not possible since the miners are using only upper seam in the coal belts.
Answering to the questions of Sahara Power plant Birodhi Manch, he said as there is no proper research data existing regarding increase of temperature due to thermal plant establishment. He also said that Titlagarah has very high temperature since last 200 years, may be due to locational aspects or geological settings of the locality and urged the scientific community to produce scientific evidence regarding increased temperature due to coal power plants. Simultaneously, he expresses his concerns over displacement issues and said peoples demands need to be answered by Government, specifically by developing sound method of compensation. There is a need to adopt attitudinal changes both for companies and Government.
He also mentioned about the Government policies regarding coal withdrawal. Since Odisha is having very low quality coal (ash content around 30%), it need to be washed before transportation, further worsening the state of environment at the source. Again when it is used in the local industry as raw material, it is accelerating the environmental degradation.
Answering to the issue raised by Tapan Padhi, he justified Government’s decision to spend 3,000 crore rupees to make improvements in energy efficiency through reduction in transmission losses in the form of improved maintenance practices. Further, he said it was required to strengthen the electricity infrastructure just after the super cyclone in 1999 and to overcome the operational issues in terms of cable snapping and high maintenance cost. Though he admitted the part failure of state in power sector reforms, Odisha being the first to embrace the reforms, said the conditions have improved significantly over the years.
He also pointed out Government need to be guided, a skilled set of Government employees need to be developed, internal governance mechanism need to be improved, and Government policies must be revisited and refined for a pro poor and pro people approach.
Working groups and Co-ordination Committee
Working Groups-
1. People's voices on energy - Sagar Dhara
2. Campaign and lobby strategy on energy – K. Chaitanya Kumar, Jai Krishna
3. Shadow IEP and Policies- Shankar Sharma, Shripad Dharmadhikari, Sagar Dhara, Chicu Liyanwa, Madhuresh Kumar, S.P Ravi
4. Solutions + Alternatives – Avinash Krishna Murthy, Vinay Jaju, Sudheer Kumar P V, Dr. Ashok Kundapur
Regional Workshops
1. South- Walter Mendonza
2. East + Central India- Sudarshan Chhotray
3. North- Chicu Liyanwa & Madhuresh Kumar
4. West- Walter Mendonza
5. Northeast- Madhuresh Kumar
6. Deccan – K Chaitanya Kumar
Co-ordination Committee
1. Shankar Sharma
2. K. Chaitanya Kumar
3. Madhuresh Kumar
4. Walter Mendonza
5. Preethi Herman
6. Sudarshan Chhotray
Annexure 1
National Conclave on Energy
(towards a People-centred Alliance in the context of Climate Change)
26 -27 March 2011, Bhuvaneshwar, Odisha
Agenda
26th March 2011
Morning session – 10:00 am to 1:00 pm
Facilitated by Walter Mendoza
Welcome and logistics – 5 minutes
Inaugural session - 20 mins
Briefing – objectives and expected outcomes of the conclave – 30 minutes
Introductions of participants – 1 hour
Power scenario, identifying issues / major concerns in Energy Policy - 30 Minutes – Shankar Sharma
Comments and Discussion – 40 mins
Afternoon session – 2:00 pm to 5:30 pm
Open Discussions on issues that will drive the Programme of Action
Session 1 – 2:00 pm – 3:00 pm
Conventional Energy Options – Coal, Large Hydro, Nuclear, Gas etc
Facilitated by Bharat Jhunjunwala
Sessions 2 - 3:00 pm – 4:00 pm
Large Scale and Decentralised Renewable Energy Options – Wind, Solar, Biomass etc
Facilitated by Preethi Herman
Tea Break : 4:00 pm – 4:30 pm
Sessions 3 - 4:30 pm – 5:30 pm
Demand and Supply, Energy Access and Delivery Systems.
Facilitated by Walter Mendoza
Evening session – 7:00- 8:30 pm
Specific 15-minute presentations to supplement the day’s discussions on issues and concerns
Facilitated by Preethi Herman
27th March 2011
Morning session – 9.00 am to 11.30 pm
Programme of Action: The Way Forward
Session 1 – 9:00 am- 10:00 am
Lobbying and campaigning at the centre and the states for sustainable energy options
Facilitated by Dr. Bharat Jhunjunwala
Sessions 2 - 10:00 am to 11:00 am
Regional Workshops - issues and responsibilities
Facilitated by Shankar Sharma
Tea Break : 11:00 am - 11:30 am
Sessions 3 – 11:30 am- 12:30 pm
Working Groups – Policy reviews and proposals, Advocacy action plans
Facilitated by Preethi Herman
Session 4 - 12:30 pm- 01:20 pm
Organizational setup, steering group and financing the alliance activities
Facilitated by Bharat Jhunjunwala
Closing session - 1:20 - 1:30 Sudarshan
Lunch : 1:30 pm- 2:00 pm
Afternoon session – 2.00 pm to 5.30 pm
Press Conference – 2:00 – 3:00 pm
Public meeting : focus on Orissa- 3:00 - 5:30 pm
Facilitated by Sudarshan
Thursday, 5 May 2011
Thursday, 21 April 2011
India: Orissa Draft Climate Change Action Plan-Press Release: Asian Human Rights Commission
India: Orissa Draft Climate Change Action Plan
Monday, 28 June 2010, 6:20 pm
Press Release: Asian Human Rights Commission
INDIA: Civil Society Rejects the Orissa Draft Climate Change Action Plan and Calls for a Odisha-sensitive Plan to be prepared through an Inclusive and Decentralized Process from below
The draft Climate Change Action Plan of Orissa (CCAP) prepared at the aegis of the World Bank and DFID does not consider the concern and interest of common odia, neither reflect state’s seriousness towards self-discipline, sobriety and adaptation, rather vociferously reiterates its nexus with neo-liberal lobby which propounds reckless industrialization and unwarranted investment. Notwithstanding the fact that its citizens are either the victims of Climate Change or are the vulnerable lot at coast and the hills, in spite of living a low-emission or net-absorption livelihoods, the authors of the document treat them as the Climate Criminals while allowing the criminals to expand and multiply their crimes. With its focus on promoting investment-intensive mitigation measures as a tool to encourage state’s ongoing unabated industrialization drive, it looks more as an “Inv estment Plan for Industrialization and Mitigation’ offering almost nothing for state’s farmers, fishers, forest-produce gatherers.
Related Stories on Scoop
* Indonesia: Intelligence bill drafting 08/04/2011
* India: Draft law against torture 22/07/2010
* INDIA: Government Of Orissa Trying To Cover Up 07/03/2010
* India: Human Rights In Orissa 09/12/2009
* Women in Pakistan Hit Hardest By Climate Change 29/10/2009
Results powered by search.scoop.co.nz More Related Stories >>>
Orissa government’s Draft Climate Change Action Plan with a huge budget of Rs. 17,000 crore seeks to help industries more by reducing their expenditure on adapting to climate change, while providing hardly any budget for the victims of climate change at Saatabhayaa, around Talcher and Jharsuguda. It proposes a 15 fold increase in the capacity of thermal power plants at the guise of improvement technology which alone could lead to at least thirteen times higher levels of emission of heat and pollution. One can imagine the hazards that already boiling Talcher and Jharsuguda will face in this scenario. A budget of Rs. 5,500 crore is made for reducing transmission and distribution losses which is only going to help private energy companies sell more electricity and make more money. On the contrary allocation of mere Rs. 4 crore for the establishment of biogas plants can support only about 5000 biogas plants, which is even insufficient for one block.
There is hardly any money allocated for developing small and micro level irrigation facilities or in providing adaptive seeds to farmers. There is no allocation for increasing the supply of electricity to farmers. On the other hand the government has planned for enhancing the fees for irrigation. Over the last ten years, the government has kept on increasing the fees it collects from farmers for supplying irrigation water to them, while allowing industries to use increasing quantities of water, often without formal permission and from sources earmarked for irrigation purposes, without having to pay much.
The plan has more than Rs. 3,000 crore for the forest department, while the villagers who have sacrificed so much to protect their forests under community forest management /joint forest management have been allocated nothing but a small amount of five crore rupees for training purposes. In transport sector, 80% of the allocated budget for this sector is for highways while there is no budget for rail or for promoting the use of non-motorised transport such as bicycles.
Two of the most critical areas climate change impacts are falling production in agriculture, livestock & fishery; and increasing health hazards due to heat related illnesses and accidents. There is no budget under the action plan for something as obvious and basic as preventing and treating heat strokes. The livestock sector is seen by the government less as a victim of climate change and more as a producer of methane. The climate change action plan accuses the farmers of Orissa of not killing old and unproductive cattle due to religious cultural reasons and that this leads to large methane emissions.
An overall reading of the Orissa climate change action plan leads to the following conclusions:
1. It’s a hurriedly drafted document ghost-written by the World Bank and other External Agencies.
2. Notwithstanding the importance and implication of the document, the process of preparation of draft document has not been inclusive. There has been no involvement of civil society and other non-government stakeholders including academia, researchers, legislatures, PRIs, NGOs and the important climate refugees and vulnerable communities from different parts of the state in the drafting processes. Even the comments and suggestions provided by some of these stakeholders who were invited to the hurriedly called 4 stakeholder consultations have been ignored and not incorporated.
3. It treats Orissa as a cause of climate change while Orissa is actually a victim of climate change. Naturally it wants to impose the price of reducing emission of green house gases on the ordinary people of Orissa, who lives either low-emission or net-carbon-absorption livelihoods.
4. In spite of the heat wave conditions that have killed thousands of people in Orissa, the Action Plan seeks to ratify the setting up of large numbers of new thermal power plans which will lead to at least thirteen times growth in emissions and pollutions, thus would risk temperature increase.
5. It accepts that climate change is going to cause erratic monsoons and increased incidence of droughts and reduce agricultural production. However it proposes not increasing irrigation coverage but increase in water tariff collected from farmers.
6. It blames the people of Orissa keeping their old cows and bullocks and encourages that they should allow such animals to die.
7. It pays only lip service to the issue of renewable energy such as biogas or solar powers and allocates very small budgets for these areas. On the other hand it allocates large amounts of public money to help electricity companies increase profits by reducing transmission losses.
8. It tries to peddle false assumptions that bio-fuels will lead to lower carbon emissions. Bio-fuels can only lead to saving in petroleum use but not reduce carbon emissions as when bio-fuels are burnt, that too released green house gases. It encourages the diversion of land to growing bio-fuels which will lead to reduction in the availability of food and fodder.
9. It pays lip service to development of public transport, railways and non-motorised transport. But it does not allocate any budgets for these while allocating 80% of the transport sector budget for highways.
10. It ignores the contribution of community forest management in protecting and developing Orissa’ forests and allocates no budget for helping villages that are protecting their forests to gain access to alternate livelihoods and alternate fuel sources.
11. It pays only lip service to preventing and curing the health impacts of increasing temperatures and makes no budget allocation for preventing or treating heat strokes in spite of thousands of people having died due to heat strokes in the last few years.
It is important that the government have a genuine participatory process where academics, people currently affected severely by climate change, other people under threat of climate change impact, experienced bureaucrats, civil society organisations, people’s representatives debate on the issue of impact of climate change on Orissa in a decentralized manner from below. The principal approach should be to ensure that the state has systems to generate resources from global funds as well as in judiciously directing its own resources for fighting climate change and its impacts. Such resources should be used to reduce the impact of climate change on the people of Orissa, especially the people who are more vulnerable and unable to adapt without external support. It is important that the state should ponder over its industrialization and extractive development trajectory and comes out with a policy based on self discipline, sobriety and temperance in resource use. This draft sh ould be rejected altogether and a new decentralized, inclusive process be initiated from below with multistakeholders participation with a spirit of Odia nationalism rather than under the influence of the World Bank.
Focus Orissa Forum on Climate Change
Sudarshan Chhotoray
Dr.S.N.Patro
Achyut Das
Biswajit Mohanty
Bibhudhendra P Das
Dr. J.Panigrahi
Dhirendra Panda
Pranb Choudhury
Manas Ranjan
Kalish Das
Tapan Padhi
Pravat Sutar
Prasant Mohanty
Mangaraj Panda
Bisikesan Jani
Ranjan Panda
Bibekananda Pattanaik
Bidyut Mohanty
Pradip Pradhan
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
ENDS
Monday, 28 June 2010, 6:20 pm
Press Release: Asian Human Rights Commission
INDIA: Civil Society Rejects the Orissa Draft Climate Change Action Plan and Calls for a Odisha-sensitive Plan to be prepared through an Inclusive and Decentralized Process from below
The draft Climate Change Action Plan of Orissa (CCAP) prepared at the aegis of the World Bank and DFID does not consider the concern and interest of common odia, neither reflect state’s seriousness towards self-discipline, sobriety and adaptation, rather vociferously reiterates its nexus with neo-liberal lobby which propounds reckless industrialization and unwarranted investment. Notwithstanding the fact that its citizens are either the victims of Climate Change or are the vulnerable lot at coast and the hills, in spite of living a low-emission or net-absorption livelihoods, the authors of the document treat them as the Climate Criminals while allowing the criminals to expand and multiply their crimes. With its focus on promoting investment-intensive mitigation measures as a tool to encourage state’s ongoing unabated industrialization drive, it looks more as an “Inv estment Plan for Industrialization and Mitigation’ offering almost nothing for state’s farmers, fishers, forest-produce gatherers.
Related Stories on Scoop
* Indonesia: Intelligence bill drafting 08/04/2011
* India: Draft law against torture 22/07/2010
* INDIA: Government Of Orissa Trying To Cover Up 07/03/2010
* India: Human Rights In Orissa 09/12/2009
* Women in Pakistan Hit Hardest By Climate Change 29/10/2009
Results powered by search.scoop.co.nz More Related Stories >>>
Orissa government’s Draft Climate Change Action Plan with a huge budget of Rs. 17,000 crore seeks to help industries more by reducing their expenditure on adapting to climate change, while providing hardly any budget for the victims of climate change at Saatabhayaa, around Talcher and Jharsuguda. It proposes a 15 fold increase in the capacity of thermal power plants at the guise of improvement technology which alone could lead to at least thirteen times higher levels of emission of heat and pollution. One can imagine the hazards that already boiling Talcher and Jharsuguda will face in this scenario. A budget of Rs. 5,500 crore is made for reducing transmission and distribution losses which is only going to help private energy companies sell more electricity and make more money. On the contrary allocation of mere Rs. 4 crore for the establishment of biogas plants can support only about 5000 biogas plants, which is even insufficient for one block.
There is hardly any money allocated for developing small and micro level irrigation facilities or in providing adaptive seeds to farmers. There is no allocation for increasing the supply of electricity to farmers. On the other hand the government has planned for enhancing the fees for irrigation. Over the last ten years, the government has kept on increasing the fees it collects from farmers for supplying irrigation water to them, while allowing industries to use increasing quantities of water, often without formal permission and from sources earmarked for irrigation purposes, without having to pay much.
The plan has more than Rs. 3,000 crore for the forest department, while the villagers who have sacrificed so much to protect their forests under community forest management /joint forest management have been allocated nothing but a small amount of five crore rupees for training purposes. In transport sector, 80% of the allocated budget for this sector is for highways while there is no budget for rail or for promoting the use of non-motorised transport such as bicycles.
Two of the most critical areas climate change impacts are falling production in agriculture, livestock & fishery; and increasing health hazards due to heat related illnesses and accidents. There is no budget under the action plan for something as obvious and basic as preventing and treating heat strokes. The livestock sector is seen by the government less as a victim of climate change and more as a producer of methane. The climate change action plan accuses the farmers of Orissa of not killing old and unproductive cattle due to religious cultural reasons and that this leads to large methane emissions.
An overall reading of the Orissa climate change action plan leads to the following conclusions:
1. It’s a hurriedly drafted document ghost-written by the World Bank and other External Agencies.
2. Notwithstanding the importance and implication of the document, the process of preparation of draft document has not been inclusive. There has been no involvement of civil society and other non-government stakeholders including academia, researchers, legislatures, PRIs, NGOs and the important climate refugees and vulnerable communities from different parts of the state in the drafting processes. Even the comments and suggestions provided by some of these stakeholders who were invited to the hurriedly called 4 stakeholder consultations have been ignored and not incorporated.
3. It treats Orissa as a cause of climate change while Orissa is actually a victim of climate change. Naturally it wants to impose the price of reducing emission of green house gases on the ordinary people of Orissa, who lives either low-emission or net-carbon-absorption livelihoods.
4. In spite of the heat wave conditions that have killed thousands of people in Orissa, the Action Plan seeks to ratify the setting up of large numbers of new thermal power plans which will lead to at least thirteen times growth in emissions and pollutions, thus would risk temperature increase.
5. It accepts that climate change is going to cause erratic monsoons and increased incidence of droughts and reduce agricultural production. However it proposes not increasing irrigation coverage but increase in water tariff collected from farmers.
6. It blames the people of Orissa keeping their old cows and bullocks and encourages that they should allow such animals to die.
7. It pays only lip service to the issue of renewable energy such as biogas or solar powers and allocates very small budgets for these areas. On the other hand it allocates large amounts of public money to help electricity companies increase profits by reducing transmission losses.
8. It tries to peddle false assumptions that bio-fuels will lead to lower carbon emissions. Bio-fuels can only lead to saving in petroleum use but not reduce carbon emissions as when bio-fuels are burnt, that too released green house gases. It encourages the diversion of land to growing bio-fuels which will lead to reduction in the availability of food and fodder.
9. It pays lip service to development of public transport, railways and non-motorised transport. But it does not allocate any budgets for these while allocating 80% of the transport sector budget for highways.
10. It ignores the contribution of community forest management in protecting and developing Orissa’ forests and allocates no budget for helping villages that are protecting their forests to gain access to alternate livelihoods and alternate fuel sources.
11. It pays only lip service to preventing and curing the health impacts of increasing temperatures and makes no budget allocation for preventing or treating heat strokes in spite of thousands of people having died due to heat strokes in the last few years.
It is important that the government have a genuine participatory process where academics, people currently affected severely by climate change, other people under threat of climate change impact, experienced bureaucrats, civil society organisations, people’s representatives debate on the issue of impact of climate change on Orissa in a decentralized manner from below. The principal approach should be to ensure that the state has systems to generate resources from global funds as well as in judiciously directing its own resources for fighting climate change and its impacts. Such resources should be used to reduce the impact of climate change on the people of Orissa, especially the people who are more vulnerable and unable to adapt without external support. It is important that the state should ponder over its industrialization and extractive development trajectory and comes out with a policy based on self discipline, sobriety and temperance in resource use. This draft sh ould be rejected altogether and a new decentralized, inclusive process be initiated from below with multistakeholders participation with a spirit of Odia nationalism rather than under the influence of the World Bank.
Focus Orissa Forum on Climate Change
Sudarshan Chhotoray
Dr.S.N.Patro
Achyut Das
Biswajit Mohanty
Bibhudhendra P Das
Dr. J.Panigrahi
Dhirendra Panda
Pranb Choudhury
Manas Ranjan
Kalish Das
Tapan Padhi
Pravat Sutar
Prasant Mohanty
Mangaraj Panda
Bisikesan Jani
Ranjan Panda
Bibekananda Pattanaik
Bidyut Mohanty
Pradip Pradhan
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
ENDS
Focus Orissa Summit 2008 calls for participatory democracy
Focus Orissa Summit 2008 calls for participatory democracy
Bhubaneswar (Orissa) : The two-day summit of Focus Orissa here on Saturday expressed serious concern on the deteriorating quality of life of the majuscule section of society and called for true participatory democracy, which can only ensure equitable development and the much needed level playing field to the millions of the depressed people.
The summit deliberated on various themes like financial inclusion, governance, issues of migration and displacement etc and the representatives of political parties, trade unions, journalist, social activists, academicians, intellectuals etc took part in the discussion.
Expressing concerns over the current mode of exclusive development that caters to only the elite section of the society and excluding the marginalized section, the participants brought to the fore the impact of neo liberal policies that was adopted by the government about two decades before.
The decreasing trend of budgetary allocation toward social sector like health, education worried the participants. It was argued that where on one hand the government drastically reduced subsidy in these needy sectors, how the same government is providing subsidized minerals to the corporate?
They reiterate the need of formulating a "Resource Management Policy"
The former Minister of State for Finance, Panchanan Kanongo, stressed the need of prioritizing the need to increasing the food production than pursuing aggressive industrial policy.
With the agriculture being unsustainable and non availability of adequate unskilled labour in the villages, people in the rural areas have no option but to migrate to other states and face inhuman conditions there.
In an effort to put up a platform for debate and discussion on the various issues concerning development of Orissa, Focus Orissa, a e-group which was started before about three years, held two-day long summit in association with Agami Orissa, another e group of the state on "Shaping the development debate of Orissa" here, activist Pradeep Baisakha said.
http://www.odishatoday.com/Focus_Orissa_Summit_2008_1010332.html
Bhubaneswar (Orissa) : The two-day summit of Focus Orissa here on Saturday expressed serious concern on the deteriorating quality of life of the majuscule section of society and called for true participatory democracy, which can only ensure equitable development and the much needed level playing field to the millions of the depressed people.
The summit deliberated on various themes like financial inclusion, governance, issues of migration and displacement etc and the representatives of political parties, trade unions, journalist, social activists, academicians, intellectuals etc took part in the discussion.
Expressing concerns over the current mode of exclusive development that caters to only the elite section of the society and excluding the marginalized section, the participants brought to the fore the impact of neo liberal policies that was adopted by the government about two decades before.
The decreasing trend of budgetary allocation toward social sector like health, education worried the participants. It was argued that where on one hand the government drastically reduced subsidy in these needy sectors, how the same government is providing subsidized minerals to the corporate?
They reiterate the need of formulating a "Resource Management Policy"
The former Minister of State for Finance, Panchanan Kanongo, stressed the need of prioritizing the need to increasing the food production than pursuing aggressive industrial policy.
With the agriculture being unsustainable and non availability of adequate unskilled labour in the villages, people in the rural areas have no option but to migrate to other states and face inhuman conditions there.
In an effort to put up a platform for debate and discussion on the various issues concerning development of Orissa, Focus Orissa, a e-group which was started before about three years, held two-day long summit in association with Agami Orissa, another e group of the state on "Shaping the development debate of Orissa" here, activist Pradeep Baisakha said.
http://www.odishatoday.com/Focus_Orissa_Summit_2008_1010332.html
Orissa Focus organises workshop on climate change
http://www.merinews.com/article/orissa-focus-organises-workshop-on-climate-change/15790182.shtml
Orissa Focus organises workshop on climate change
Orissa is experiencing natural disasters now on a yearly basis. To counter this, the Orissa government has already installed a radar in Paradeep with an investment of Rs 12 crore for Tsunami and cyclone warning assessment.
LAST YEAR, Focus Orissa had organised a two days’ workshop on Climate Change at the Redcross Bhavan, Bhubaneswar. Since then, while the concerns and actions of civil society and people in general is multiplying to prevent climate change, the world has been witnessing non-serious approaches by world governments, including India, in policy level dialogues and necessary follow ups to reverse the trend. On the other hand, there is hardly any change in the rate of increase of global warming.
The COP (Conference of Parties) 15 – the 15th Conference of United Nations Framework Conventions on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is going to be held during December 7-18 at Copenhagen, involving environment ministers and concerned officials of 189 countries to review the progress till now and to reconcile the protocols on climate change. About 10000 participants, including representatives of business groups, non-governmental organisations and others as observers may participate in it.
After 15 years of engagements by world governments and corporations through such COPs, hardly anything has been achieved in terms of controlling CFC emissions, global warming and minimising the trends of climate change. Till now, there has been no consensus between the leading countries.
Many are not much hopeful about the outcomes of the COP 15 other than some concessions to corporations and continuance of the failed Kyoto protocol. India like China, instead of taking a pro-active role in controlling GHG emissions, is seeking maximum monetary inflows through the CDM and giving undue importance to domestic trading in credits under its mitigation programmes.
In this context, we need to discuss the issue intensively and take a position viewing forthcoming COP 15. We need to inform our concerns as regards to the policies and approaches of the Government of India and participants of COP 15. Keeping this purpose in view and to workout our future action plans, Focus Orissa forum on Climate Change is going to organise a state level workshop on Climate Justice - Our Message to COP 15 on December6 and 18, in Bhubaneswar.
The two day consultation organised on November 15 and 16, 2008 had expressed that Orissa needs to have a task force on climate change. It had also consented to have various research studies and action programs in the line of adaptation and mitigation of climate change. That must be people’s focus and environment friendly. At the same time, its important to have a network of all sections of people to take this campaign forward under the banner of Focus Orissa.
Places in Orissa like Puri, Gopalpur Satabhaya and Kantiagarh sea beaches are vulnerable to climate change caused sea erosion, while Titilagarh, Talcher, Sukinda and Jharsuguda have seen unprecedented warming in climate. Unprecedented floods, cyclone, drought and sunstroke are being experienced every year where thousands of causalities, loss of habitats and livelihoods are reported.
Orissa is experiencing natural disasters now on a yearly basis. To counter this, the Orissa government has already installed a radar in Paradeep with an investment of Rs 12 crore for Tsunami and cyclone warning assessment. According to government sources, several other such projects are also in the pipeline. Yet much more is required.
Join the workshop to deliberate on these and many other such issues at the regional science centre, Acharya Vihar, Bhubneshwar.
Orissa Focus organises workshop on climate change
Orissa is experiencing natural disasters now on a yearly basis. To counter this, the Orissa government has already installed a radar in Paradeep with an investment of Rs 12 crore for Tsunami and cyclone warning assessment.
LAST YEAR, Focus Orissa had organised a two days’ workshop on Climate Change at the Redcross Bhavan, Bhubaneswar. Since then, while the concerns and actions of civil society and people in general is multiplying to prevent climate change, the world has been witnessing non-serious approaches by world governments, including India, in policy level dialogues and necessary follow ups to reverse the trend. On the other hand, there is hardly any change in the rate of increase of global warming.
The COP (Conference of Parties) 15 – the 15th Conference of United Nations Framework Conventions on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is going to be held during December 7-18 at Copenhagen, involving environment ministers and concerned officials of 189 countries to review the progress till now and to reconcile the protocols on climate change. About 10000 participants, including representatives of business groups, non-governmental organisations and others as observers may participate in it.
After 15 years of engagements by world governments and corporations through such COPs, hardly anything has been achieved in terms of controlling CFC emissions, global warming and minimising the trends of climate change. Till now, there has been no consensus between the leading countries.
Many are not much hopeful about the outcomes of the COP 15 other than some concessions to corporations and continuance of the failed Kyoto protocol. India like China, instead of taking a pro-active role in controlling GHG emissions, is seeking maximum monetary inflows through the CDM and giving undue importance to domestic trading in credits under its mitigation programmes.
In this context, we need to discuss the issue intensively and take a position viewing forthcoming COP 15. We need to inform our concerns as regards to the policies and approaches of the Government of India and participants of COP 15. Keeping this purpose in view and to workout our future action plans, Focus Orissa forum on Climate Change is going to organise a state level workshop on Climate Justice - Our Message to COP 15 on December6 and 18, in Bhubaneswar.
The two day consultation organised on November 15 and 16, 2008 had expressed that Orissa needs to have a task force on climate change. It had also consented to have various research studies and action programs in the line of adaptation and mitigation of climate change. That must be people’s focus and environment friendly. At the same time, its important to have a network of all sections of people to take this campaign forward under the banner of Focus Orissa.
Places in Orissa like Puri, Gopalpur Satabhaya and Kantiagarh sea beaches are vulnerable to climate change caused sea erosion, while Titilagarh, Talcher, Sukinda and Jharsuguda have seen unprecedented warming in climate. Unprecedented floods, cyclone, drought and sunstroke are being experienced every year where thousands of causalities, loss of habitats and livelihoods are reported.
Orissa is experiencing natural disasters now on a yearly basis. To counter this, the Orissa government has already installed a radar in Paradeep with an investment of Rs 12 crore for Tsunami and cyclone warning assessment. According to government sources, several other such projects are also in the pipeline. Yet much more is required.
Join the workshop to deliberate on these and many other such issues at the regional science centre, Acharya Vihar, Bhubneshwar.
Memorandum on Climate Justice to PM of India
MEMORANDUM TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
ON THE UNFCCC’s 15th CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES AT COPENHAGEN
Dear Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,
We, the undersigned people’s organisations, social movements, trade unions and concerned citizens, submit this memorandum to the Government to draw your attention to the several urgent and so far unaddressed concerns about the climate crisis and the Indian Government’s response to them, especially in light of the upcoming 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at Copenhagen from 7-18 December 2009.
We believe that the economic and political issues of inequality, both within and between nations, grievously impact distribution and consumption and are at the core of the crisis of global warming and of responding meaningfully to it. The crisis is also about a few usurping the rights and access of the vast majority of the disempowered over the commons – air, water, land, minerals and forests. Unsustainable economic development and inequitable growth based on an economy dependent on the use of fossil-fuels and extractive industries — which intensified in the last 60 years — have led to the sharp rise in carbon emissions, way beyond what the Earth can absorb. The global annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have reached about 35 billion tonnes a year from the burning of coal, oil and gas, and from deforestation. This is much more than the net absorption capacity of the Earth, estimated to be 16-17 billion tonnes a year or roughly 2.5 tonnes per person, which is declining due to a gradual warming of the oceans.
Hence, there is an extremely urgent need to make sharp and immediate cuts in the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). We fear that this urgency has not been reflected in the ongoing negotiations leading up to Copenhagen, neither in the Indian government’s position and policy interventions, nor in the positions of governments worldwide. The urgency stems from the fact that scientific evidence suggests we may already be close to significant tipping points in some of the Earth’s major ecosystems. Crossing a tipping point — whereby natural systems deteriorate even without any further human intervention — will make it that much more difficult for us to collectively intervene in halting possibly runaway global warming. We need to make drastic cuts in emissions, starting immediately. Anything less or watered down at Copenhagen will have massive consequences for humanity and for other species.
INDIA IS IN THE FRONTLINE OF CLIMATE VULNERABILITY
Climate change has become a serious threat to the poor, particularly in developing countries. Impacts are going to get unavoidably worse, with massive disruption and loss of human life and of other species that invisibly support our ecosystems. In India, widespread and significant impacts of climate change have been noticed for at least 10-15 years in many regions. These impacts are adversely affecting the urban working poor, the lives and livelihoods of the Himalayan and other hill people, fishing communities and other coastal and island communities, small, marginal and rainfed farmers and agricultural labourers, dalits, women, adivasis, forest dwellers, and other disadvantaged and marginalised communities in different regions. Published scientific evidence and other observations of people from different communities reveal that the following are some of the major impacts that are already visible:
• Changing rainfall patterns, reduced rains in July and in winter, shorter south-west monsoon, and intense rains in a short period. This is hurting both small agriculture and water sources and causing unprecedented floods and soil erosion in some places.
• In the mid-level Himalayas, reduced snow at mid- to high altitudes, warmer winters, shifting of fruits and crops to higher levels, spread of mosquitoes and vector-borne disease to new areas, drying up of streams, disappearance of small glaciers and receding of large glaciers.
• The spread and intensification of drought in large parts of India leading to massive forced migration, agrarian distress and mass abandoning of livestock.
• In forest areas, the migration of species to higher altitudes, the loss of biodiversity, the greater incidence of pests, increased growth of weeds, greater frequency of forest fires, the decline in stock of certain medicinal plants, and reduced growth of forests and grasslands.
• The drying of water sources that supply water for drinking and for livelihoods at many places.
• Sea level rise along many coastlines, depletion and migration of fish stocks, and ingress of saline water due to storm surges.
These impacts influence and aggravate a range of other crises with systemic roots, for example the agrarian crisis. It is widely accepted by scientists that the impacts are going worsen further, and will happen simultaneously, hitting the poor in different regions.
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA’S POSITION
The Indian Government’s stand on climate change needs to reflect this urgency. It should affirm the principles of equity, justice and sustainability as essential for effective global and national policy towards climate change governed through a democratic and participatory regulatory mechanism.
Our views on the GOI’s stand in key areas in the climate negotiations are as follows:
a. Mitigation: The Government’s stand that India’s per capita emissions are low and it will “not allow its per capita GHG emissions to exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries” (The Road to Copenhagen, MEA, GOI, 2009) is nothing but hiding behind the poor and is potentially dangerous because it will worsen the climate crisis in the long run. India’s average emissions are relatively low for the time being because of the abysmal poverty of the overwhelming majority of this country; in contrast, the elites in this country have emissions approaching European levels. India needs to adopt and push for equity internally on a per capita emissions basis, the same principle it is arguing for in international negotiations. India’s energy policy for the foreseeable future is based on polluting fossil fuels, driven by a model of industrialization directed primarily at elite consumption. This needs to drastically decrease and therefore a complete rethink of our energy policy is essential.
b. Adaptation: The Government’s claim that it is spending “up to 2.5% of GDP on adaptation” is an accounting sleight of hand. The 2009-10 Budget documents reveal that much of the increase in expenditure for the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) and the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) is being accounted for as Adaptation Funds. On the other hand, crucial areas for adaptation such as mangrove conservation, wetlands conservation, protection of rivers and other groundwater recharging systems, afforestation, methods of cultivation such as the system of rice intensification and organic farming and the biodiversity conservation programme have received scant attention and meagre allocations. Also, the shocking lack of prior information, preparedness and action regarding several disasters such as the recent drought, Krishna basin floods and the Aila disaster in the Sunderbans indicate that much more needs to be done and with greater urgency. Unavoidable worsening impacts suggest that they need to be anticipated and prepared for in advance.
c. Technology: Any technology transfer negotiated as part of the Copenhagen process should be free of conditionalities and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) restrictions. We need to ensure that we adopt solution-based technologies rather than technology-driven solutions. The belief that large technologies will provide the solution evades the centrality of the need to reduce elite consumption, in India and the world. It brings in large capital and takes solutions out of people’s hands. We urge the adoption of decentralized, small and sustainable technologies that are appropriate for people’s needs. Many such technologies and materials already exist and need to be examined and improved upon before we venture into blind import of technology.
d. Finance: We support the stand proposed by the Bolivian government that industrialized countries should pay for their enormous historical emission and adaptation debts to the developing world, including India and the Indian poor. Any financial transfer mechanism and its ultimate use needs to be transparent, decentralized, democratic and decided by the people at all levels – through participation in consultation with national, state and local self-governments. However, we do not believe that adaptation and basic technology implementation in a large developing country such as India is in any way contingent on the prior transfer of financial resources.
Additionally,
• We view the Government’s formulation and finalization of India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) and its eight missions as undemocratic and unilateral. The NAPCC does not question the current non-sustainable, high emissions pattern of economic development. Therefore the Government needs to arrive at a new NAPCC with reference to Parliament, in consultation with state and local governments, and through the widest possible participation of affected people. This must include differentiated eco-zone planning, district level vulnerability and contingency planning for disasters, industry-based reduction of emissions and people’s control mechanisms over the commons.
• Instead of addressing the crisis at its source, the Indian government is pushing for a series of non-solutions and false solutions towards mitigating emissions. Nuclear power is costly, risky, harms communities in the vicinity of uranium mines and nuclear plants and has significant embodied emissions. Agrofuels – which many state governments are promoting through jatropha plantations – take away land from food production, reduces access to the commons used by the poor and consumes enormous quantities of water. The hundreds of hydropower dams being planned and constructed across the Himalayan and other ecosystems, the Northeast region and elsewhere undermines the will of the local communities, and denies decentralized micro energy projects that would be more appropriate. Genetically Modified Organisms being proposed for mitigation and adaptation of cash and food crops will grossly undermine food security, biodiversity and cause unforeseen consequences along with deepening the control of multinationals over our food chain.
• We oppose both India’s position of ‘Compensated Conservation’ as part of the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) and its support for REDD. REDD and all other variants of carbon forestry encourage and promote the privatization and commodification of forests and their resources. There is the real danger that REDD will aggressively push a forced takeover of forest lands from communities by corporations and the Indian Forest Department. It will limit the access of forest people to their primary source of life and livelihood, who are already facing massive forced displacement in the name of ‘development’. REDD goes against people-centered forest governance, promotes the much opposed and discredited Joint Forest Management thereby undermining the recently enacted Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.
• Projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – of which India has about 1,200, both registered and under validation – prevents the physical and verifiable cuts in emissions that are so urgently needed, as does REDD. Carbon offsets perpetuate elite consumption in the misplaced hope that it can be compensated for. CDM in India is dominated by polluting industries that continue to harm communities and ecosystems, emit toxic fly ash and carbon, pollute rivers and underground aquifers. Corporations with bad environmental track records earn huge money through flimsy, non-verifiable and mostly false claims of emissions reductions.
• At the Bangkok UNFCCC meeting in September-October 2009, the US introduced a proposed structure for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of mitigation actions. It seeks to extend MRV to all countries except the least developed countries (LDCs). The word “commitment” in relation is absent in the US draft. We see this as an important shift in the language of global climate change agreement from binding commitments to that of mitigating “actions”. The Indian government should strongly oppose this watering down of the proposed regulatory mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol for developed economies.
WE DEMAND:
1. Given the increasing risk to life and life-support systems in the world, the Copenhagen Conference should declare a Global Climate Emergency.
2. A real and verifiable emission cut that is legally binding by the industrialized (Annex 1) countries of at least 50% by 2020, 70% by 2030 and 90% by 2050, over 1990 levels, and not left to voluntary “actions” of the industralised countries. The cuts should be within national borders, not offset through market and/or other mechanisms such as the CDM, and these cuts should start immediately.
3. The post-Kyoto process of collective negotiation needs to be strengthened, deepened and widened on the issue of cuts in greenhouse gases. This is being undermined by the industrialized nations, who are pushing for voluntary and individual national cuts. We demand that the baseline for emission cuts should be kept at the 1990 level as agreed.
4. Large emitters, including China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa, should rapidly shift away from their high-consumption and high-emission development trajectories, while promoting internal equity. They need to commit to necessary and binding reduction targets along with sharp cuts by Annex 1 countries. India should take the lead in building a consensus among developing economies to commit to mitigation targets, which should be binding through national legislation. In this context, the Government of India should reformulate the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 so as to incorporate the mitigation target based on a principle of democratic industrialization that ensures equity and social justice.
5. The Indian government should revise its unsustainable development trajectory of several decades. This phase has witnessed the exploitation of natural resources, the greater displacement of adivasis and other forest dwellers, intensified exploitation and continued pauperization of the urban poor, casualisation and contractualisation of labour, and the promotion of consumption by and production for elites. Such an anti-poor development trajectory — a trajectory reflected in the toothless Biodiversity Act 2002, the much-diluted EIA Notification, 2006, the industry-oriented National Environment Policy, 2006, the rampant violations of the CRZ Notification, and in the NAPCC and various missions under it — intrinsically leads to higher carbon emissions. We demand that emissions by elites in India be urgently brought down to 2.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita a year, thus enforcing equality and equity in resource-sharing by all Indians, and which is the maximum the Earth can currently absorb. At the same time we note that the working poor in the country are forced to consume much less than required for their well-being. Their consumption levels have to rise for them to have reasonable living standards and a life of dignity. We demand an effective framework that promotes the use of public transport alongside binding restrictions on the use of vehicles for private purposes, and one that prevents displacement of the poor in towns and cities. We demand that the livelihoods, constitutional and democratic rights of forest dwellers, fishworkers and small peasant cultivators be ensured.
6. The Indian Government should prepare a comprehensive policy for compensation of those affected by restructuring of the economy for emission cuts and arrive at an acceptable framework for re-employment of displaced workers.
7. Drastic cuts in defence expenditure, which is one of the largest consumers of energy, to promote peace in the region.
8. That the Indian government should redraw its energy strategy, moving towards more sustainable, equitable, employment and livelihood-generating renewable and bio-energy sources and strategies, in a time-bound manner. There needs to be a much more decentralized generation, transmission and use of energy. For renewable energy to be competitive and go beyond experimentation there has to be substantial government subsidy. India has vast resources of solar energy, which, if all past subsidies to conventional power and costs of mitigation of ill-effects are taken into account, becomes a cost competitive source of clean and renewable power. All this would necessitate a credible and transparent re-examination of the Electricity Act in all its ramifications.
9. The costs of mitigation and restructuring are paid for through direct investment by the government defined by the paramount principle of the public good.
10. Un-proven, anti-poor and potentially disastrous non-solutions, such as nuclear energy, agro-fuels, large hydro, CDM and hydrogen fuel should be immediately halted. A strict principle of “polluter pays” should be implemented for costing and comparing various energy options. The government must cease to be party to any disastrous market-based solutions like carbon trading.
11. We call for a new National Action Plan on Climate Change that will be arrived at after a wide consultation of people and be sanctioned by parliament.
12. We oppose any attempt to link climate change commitments to trade barriers and tariffs. The Indian government should desist from and oppose any such moves.
13. That the Government of India support the payment of ecological debt — both for historical emissions and current adaptation — as a legally binding obligation of the industrialized nations to nations and peoples of the global South. Their ecological debt should include the complete restoration of territories, and recuperation of agriculture and ecosystems. We demand the creation of alternative funding mechanisms and flows that recognize this ecological debt and respect, protect and promote the sovereignty and rights of nations and people. We demand an immediate end to any role for the World Bank and other international financial institutions (IFIs) in climate financing and to the tied use of technology to any debt repayment.
14. Our government must stand united with and protective of progressive efforts of other developing countries, G-77, the least developed countries (LDCs) and the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS). We oppose the reported moves by the Indian government to align with the United States, historically by far the largest greenhouse emitter.
The Indian government must take leadership of the countries of the global South in Copenhagen and beyond, by bringing issues of justice and equity in all their dimensions to the centrestage in climate negotiations. These need to be informed by the principle of ecological sustainability, and need to transcend barriers of generations and species and ensure rights of nations and peoples.
Copies to:
Minister of Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh
Members of Parliament
Members of PM’s Advisory Council on Climate Change
ENDORSED BY
Organisations:
1. New Trade Union Initiative (NTUI)
2. National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM)
3. National Forum of Forest Peoples and Forest Workers (NFFPFW)
4. National Fishworkers’ Forum (NFF)
5. National Adivasi Alliance
6. Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF)
7. South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP)
8. Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (KSMTF)
9. Programme for Social Action (PSA)
10. Delhi Forum
11. Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha (BJVJ)
12. South Asian Dialogue on Ecological Democracy (SADED)
13. Vettiver Collective, Chennai
14. Delhi Platform
15. Focus on the Global South
16. Pasumai Thaayagam, Tamil Nadu
17. Science for Society, Bihar
18. Socialist Front
19. Partners in Justice concerns (PJC-India)
20. Indian Network on Ethics and Climate Change (INECC)
21. Environment Support Group
22. Intercultural Resources
23. All India Forum for Right to Education
24. Equations
25. Nadi Ghati Morcha, Chhattisgarh
26. India FDI Watch
27. Indian Association for Volunteer Effort
28. Coorg Organisation for Rural Development
29. Popular Education and Action Centre (PEACE)
30. Kabani, Kerala
31. Thanal, Kerala
32. Kerala Tourism Watch
33. India FDI Watch
34. RTI Watch – India
35. Rural Volunteers’ Centre, Assam
36. River Basin Friends
37. Kaimur Kshetra Mahila Mazdoor Kisan Sangarsh Samiti, Uttar Pradesh
38. POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti, Orissa
39. Human Rights Law Centre, Robertsganj, UP
40. Niyamgiri Surakshya Manch, Orissa
41. Ma Mati Mahila Manch, Nayagarh, Orissa
42. UP Bhoomi Sudhar Avem Sharm Adikhar Samiti
43. Kriti, New Delhi
44. WaterWatch Alliance
45. Darshan, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
46. SICHREM - South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring, Bangalore
47. Deccan Development Society, Hyderabad
48. North Eastern Social Research Centre, Guwahati
49. South Against Genetic Engineering
50. Nepal Bhasha Bhashi Sangh
51. Andhra Pradesh Adivsi Aikya Vedika
52. Environics Trust, India
53. AP Alliance for Food Sovereignty
54. EKTA (Committee for Communal Amity), Mumbai
55. Tamilnadu Women's Collective
56. Institute of Alternative Approach to Development, Mahubani, Bihar
57. Millet Network of India
58. The Socialist Front, India
59. Delhi Patrakar Chaupal
60. Tamilnadu Resource Team
61. Lokayan, New Delhi
62. Prayavaranmitra, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
63. Kalanjium Unorganised Worker's Union, TN
64. Sahajeevan, Andhra Pradesh
65. Bombay Sarvodaya Friendship Centre
66. Shaheen Women Resource & Welfare Association, Hyderabad
67. Kalanjium Women Farmer's Association, TN
68. Movement Against Uranium Projects, (MAUP) Hyderabad
69. Sashipada Bandyopadhayay Resource Centre, Kolkatta
70. South Asia Forum for Human Rights (SAFHR)
71. International Presentation Association, India
72. Jamia Teacher’s Solidarity Association, New Delhi
73. People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR, Delhi)
74. Housing and Land Rights Network – India
75. MATU people’s organisation, Uttarakhand
76. CACIM (India Institute for Critical Action: Centre in Movement)
77. Navachethana, Kerala
78. Lokayat, Pune, Maharashtra
79. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, New Delhi
80. Nagarik Mancha, Kolkatta
81. Kisaan Panchayat
82. Sheep and Goat Rearers Sanghams of Medak and Chittor Districts, AP
83. Janaswarth Surakshya Parisad, Cuttack, Orissa
84. Lok Adhikar Manch, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
85. Centre for Sustainable-use of Natural and Social Resources, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
86. Chanchal Jana Kalyan Samity, Malda (West Bengal)
87. Moving Republic, Bangalore, Karnataka
88. Jyoti Mahila Samity, Bhubaneshwar Orissa
89. Orissa Human Rights Forum, Bhadrakh District,Orissa
90. Ganjam Jilla Adivasi Manch, Ganjam, Orissa
91. Global Alternate Information Applications (GAIA) Thrissur, Kerala
92. Center for Contemporary Studies & Research, Lucknow, UP
93. Samvedan Sanskritik Manch, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
94. LOK MANCH, Aurangabad, Bihar
95. Center for Social Initiatives, Gorakhpur, UP
96. Burma Centre Delhi (BCD)
97. ViBGYOR film Collective , Thrissur, Kerala
98. Centre for Education and Documentation
99. Friends, Varanasi, UP
100. Wada Trust, Sitapur, UP
101. Abdul Kalam Azad Jan Sewa Sansthan, Gazipur UP
102. Society for Integrated Development of Farming Community, Allahabad UP
103. Gramin Vikas Sansthan, Bahraich, UP
104. Dynamic Action Group, Lucknow, UP
105. Center for Policy Analysis, Lucknow, UP
106. Kisan Morcha, Bikaner, Rajasthan
107. IFFTU, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan
108. Arya Bheel Khand Rajya Morcha, Udaipur, Rajasthan
109. Matsya Mewat Shiksha Vikas Sansthan (MMSVS), Alwar, Rajasthan
110. Roopankan, Indore, Madhya Pradesh
111. Hamari Yamuna Charitable Trust, Delhi
112. Dalit Sena, Jodhpur, Rajasthan
113. KDRF, Bharatpur, Rajasthan
114. Youth Front, Pali, Rajasthan
115. Mahila Morcha, Banswara, Rajasthan
116. Chetna Sansthan, Dausa, Rajasthan
117. Dalit Women Forum, Secunderabad, AP
118. SRAVANTHI, Chittor, AP
119. YATRA, Kasargod, Kerala
120. Thope Poura Samity, Thriuvananthapuram , Kerala
121. Vikom Muhama Basheer Smarakkala Vayanasala, Kottayam, Kerala
122. Navajyothy Sangam, Kollam, Kerala
123. Society for Economic and Environmental Development (SEED), Kerala
124. Jana Sevakandra, Mammattikananam, Kerala
125. Rural Education & Development Society [REDSM], Kollam, Kerala
126. DAWN, Kottarakkara, Kerala
127. Bombay Urban Industrial League for Development (BUILD)
128. Focus Orissa-Forum On Climate Change
129. Peoples Institute for Development & Training (PIDT)
130. DICE Foundation, Nagaland
131. RCPDS (Resource Centre for participatory Development Studies), TN
132. SPEECH (Society for Peoples Education and Economic Change), TN
133. SAFE-CR (Southern Alliance for Ensuring Child Rights), TN
134. CLGC (Cluster Level Governing Council), TN
135. Penngal Kootamaipu, TN
136. Forum of collective forms of Cooperation (FCFC)
137. Society for Participatory Action and reflection (SPAR)
138. Agragati
139. Orissa Development Action Forum (ODAF)
140. Integrated Rural Development of weaker sections in India (IRDWSI), Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa
141. Centre for Research on New International Economic Order (CReNIEO), Tamilnadu and Orissa
142. Gram Vikas (GV), Orissa
143. Antyodaya Chetana Mandal (ACM), Orissa
144. Tagore Society for Rural Development (TSRD), Orissa and WB
145. Seva Bharati (SB), Orissa
146. Socio Economic Development Programme (SEDP), Orissa and WB
147. Council of Professional Social Workers (CPSW), Orissa
148. People's Institute for Participatory Action Research (PIPAR), Orissa
149. Samajika Parivartana Vikas Kendra (SPVK), Orissa
150. Rural Action for Development (RAD), Orissa
151. Samajika Vikas Kendram (SVK), Orissa
152. Odisha Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan (OAAA), Orissa
153. Adivasi Bikash Parisad, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
154. Ho Munda Bhasa Bikash Manch, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
155. Gana Chetana Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
156. Anchalik Jungle Surakshya Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
157. Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan Mayurbhanj, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
158. Jahar Surkshya Manch, Rasgovindpur, Kaptipada, Orissa
159. Balmianni Kutomi, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
160. Saura Adivasi Ahikar Abhijan, Nuagada, Gajpati, Orissa
161. Kuvi Bdayu , Bandhugaon, Koraput, Orissa
162. Loko Unnayan Sangh (LUS), Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
163. Kuvi Kulomi, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
164. Sajukodi Dhorti Surkhya Porisod, Semiliguda, Koraput, , Orissa
165. Deo-mali Mahila Sangh, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
166. Ancholiko Unnayan Sangh, Dasmonthpur, Koraput, , Orissa
167. Ancholiko Vikas Parisad, Pottangi, Koraput, , Orissa
168. Kasti Dakua Adivasi Mohasangha, Nuagaon, Nayagarh, Orissa
169. Ganglamaa Vikash Manch, Korkunda, Malkangiri, Orissa
170. Anchalika Adivasi Unnayan Parishad, Hindol, Dhenkanal, Orissa
171. Ancholia Unnayan Parishad, Phiringia, Kandhamal, Orissa
172. Zailaitmu, Tumdibandh, Kotagarh, Kandhamal, , Orissa
173. Pahadi Sangrami Manch, Kandhamal, Orissa
174. Sahaya, Kandhamal, Orissa
175. Mukti Sanghthan (The male member’s organisation), Dhenkanal, Orissa
176. Shakti Sangthan (The women member’s organisation), Dhenkanal, Orissa
177. Adivasi Dalit Adhikar Abhijan Manch, Pallahara, Anugul, Orissa
178. Malaygiri Bikash Manch, Anugul, Keonjhar, , Orissa
179. Gramanchal Bikash Parisad, Anugul, Keonjhar, Orissa
180. Anchalik Bikash Parisad, Anugul, Orissa
181. Niyamgiri Surkshya Manch, Kalahandi, Orissa
182. Gram Sahajog, Kalahandi, Orissa
183. Nari Bikash-Women Organisation, Lanjigarh, Kalahandi, Orissa
184. Adivasi Chetona Manch, Kalahandi, Orissa
185. Jungle Jivan Surakshya Parisad, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
186. Adishakti Lokbikash Sangthan, Patrapur, Gajpati, Orissa
187. Project level committee, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
188. Munigiri Gana Sangthan, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
189. Mahendragiri Adivasi Adhikar Samiti, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
190. Rusimal Anchalik Unnayan Parishad, Daringbadi, Kondhmal, Orissa
191. Aman, Uttarakhand
192. Citizens Global Platform, India
193. Bharatiya Krishak Samaj
194. Alternatives Asia
195. DK Parisarasaktara Okkuta, Mangalore, Karnataka
Individuals:
196. Dr John Dayal, Member, National Integration Council & Secretary general, All India Christian Council
197. Aashish Gupta, Researcher, Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai
198. Cynthia CJ
199. Dr. Anil Sadgopal
200. Vinod Raina
201. Prakash C. Jha
202. C. Indira Dasgupta
203. Suresh Bhat B. Member, PUCL, Dakshina Kannada (Karnataka)
204. Srihari Dukkipati - AID India
205. Birinder Pal Singh, Punjabi University, Patiala, Pujab
206. Keya Acharya, Journalist, Bangalore
207. Luit Goswami
208. Dr. Ashok Kundapur, Ph.D., International Solar Cooker Expert, Karnataka
209. Leena Padam, Jamui, Bihar
www.saded.in/Copenhagen/Climate%2520J... - Cached - Similar
ON THE UNFCCC’s 15th CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES AT COPENHAGEN
Dear Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,
We, the undersigned people’s organisations, social movements, trade unions and concerned citizens, submit this memorandum to the Government to draw your attention to the several urgent and so far unaddressed concerns about the climate crisis and the Indian Government’s response to them, especially in light of the upcoming 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at Copenhagen from 7-18 December 2009.
We believe that the economic and political issues of inequality, both within and between nations, grievously impact distribution and consumption and are at the core of the crisis of global warming and of responding meaningfully to it. The crisis is also about a few usurping the rights and access of the vast majority of the disempowered over the commons – air, water, land, minerals and forests. Unsustainable economic development and inequitable growth based on an economy dependent on the use of fossil-fuels and extractive industries — which intensified in the last 60 years — have led to the sharp rise in carbon emissions, way beyond what the Earth can absorb. The global annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have reached about 35 billion tonnes a year from the burning of coal, oil and gas, and from deforestation. This is much more than the net absorption capacity of the Earth, estimated to be 16-17 billion tonnes a year or roughly 2.5 tonnes per person, which is declining due to a gradual warming of the oceans.
Hence, there is an extremely urgent need to make sharp and immediate cuts in the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). We fear that this urgency has not been reflected in the ongoing negotiations leading up to Copenhagen, neither in the Indian government’s position and policy interventions, nor in the positions of governments worldwide. The urgency stems from the fact that scientific evidence suggests we may already be close to significant tipping points in some of the Earth’s major ecosystems. Crossing a tipping point — whereby natural systems deteriorate even without any further human intervention — will make it that much more difficult for us to collectively intervene in halting possibly runaway global warming. We need to make drastic cuts in emissions, starting immediately. Anything less or watered down at Copenhagen will have massive consequences for humanity and for other species.
INDIA IS IN THE FRONTLINE OF CLIMATE VULNERABILITY
Climate change has become a serious threat to the poor, particularly in developing countries. Impacts are going to get unavoidably worse, with massive disruption and loss of human life and of other species that invisibly support our ecosystems. In India, widespread and significant impacts of climate change have been noticed for at least 10-15 years in many regions. These impacts are adversely affecting the urban working poor, the lives and livelihoods of the Himalayan and other hill people, fishing communities and other coastal and island communities, small, marginal and rainfed farmers and agricultural labourers, dalits, women, adivasis, forest dwellers, and other disadvantaged and marginalised communities in different regions. Published scientific evidence and other observations of people from different communities reveal that the following are some of the major impacts that are already visible:
• Changing rainfall patterns, reduced rains in July and in winter, shorter south-west monsoon, and intense rains in a short period. This is hurting both small agriculture and water sources and causing unprecedented floods and soil erosion in some places.
• In the mid-level Himalayas, reduced snow at mid- to high altitudes, warmer winters, shifting of fruits and crops to higher levels, spread of mosquitoes and vector-borne disease to new areas, drying up of streams, disappearance of small glaciers and receding of large glaciers.
• The spread and intensification of drought in large parts of India leading to massive forced migration, agrarian distress and mass abandoning of livestock.
• In forest areas, the migration of species to higher altitudes, the loss of biodiversity, the greater incidence of pests, increased growth of weeds, greater frequency of forest fires, the decline in stock of certain medicinal plants, and reduced growth of forests and grasslands.
• The drying of water sources that supply water for drinking and for livelihoods at many places.
• Sea level rise along many coastlines, depletion and migration of fish stocks, and ingress of saline water due to storm surges.
These impacts influence and aggravate a range of other crises with systemic roots, for example the agrarian crisis. It is widely accepted by scientists that the impacts are going worsen further, and will happen simultaneously, hitting the poor in different regions.
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA’S POSITION
The Indian Government’s stand on climate change needs to reflect this urgency. It should affirm the principles of equity, justice and sustainability as essential for effective global and national policy towards climate change governed through a democratic and participatory regulatory mechanism.
Our views on the GOI’s stand in key areas in the climate negotiations are as follows:
a. Mitigation: The Government’s stand that India’s per capita emissions are low and it will “not allow its per capita GHG emissions to exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries” (The Road to Copenhagen, MEA, GOI, 2009) is nothing but hiding behind the poor and is potentially dangerous because it will worsen the climate crisis in the long run. India’s average emissions are relatively low for the time being because of the abysmal poverty of the overwhelming majority of this country; in contrast, the elites in this country have emissions approaching European levels. India needs to adopt and push for equity internally on a per capita emissions basis, the same principle it is arguing for in international negotiations. India’s energy policy for the foreseeable future is based on polluting fossil fuels, driven by a model of industrialization directed primarily at elite consumption. This needs to drastically decrease and therefore a complete rethink of our energy policy is essential.
b. Adaptation: The Government’s claim that it is spending “up to 2.5% of GDP on adaptation” is an accounting sleight of hand. The 2009-10 Budget documents reveal that much of the increase in expenditure for the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) and the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) is being accounted for as Adaptation Funds. On the other hand, crucial areas for adaptation such as mangrove conservation, wetlands conservation, protection of rivers and other groundwater recharging systems, afforestation, methods of cultivation such as the system of rice intensification and organic farming and the biodiversity conservation programme have received scant attention and meagre allocations. Also, the shocking lack of prior information, preparedness and action regarding several disasters such as the recent drought, Krishna basin floods and the Aila disaster in the Sunderbans indicate that much more needs to be done and with greater urgency. Unavoidable worsening impacts suggest that they need to be anticipated and prepared for in advance.
c. Technology: Any technology transfer negotiated as part of the Copenhagen process should be free of conditionalities and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) restrictions. We need to ensure that we adopt solution-based technologies rather than technology-driven solutions. The belief that large technologies will provide the solution evades the centrality of the need to reduce elite consumption, in India and the world. It brings in large capital and takes solutions out of people’s hands. We urge the adoption of decentralized, small and sustainable technologies that are appropriate for people’s needs. Many such technologies and materials already exist and need to be examined and improved upon before we venture into blind import of technology.
d. Finance: We support the stand proposed by the Bolivian government that industrialized countries should pay for their enormous historical emission and adaptation debts to the developing world, including India and the Indian poor. Any financial transfer mechanism and its ultimate use needs to be transparent, decentralized, democratic and decided by the people at all levels – through participation in consultation with national, state and local self-governments. However, we do not believe that adaptation and basic technology implementation in a large developing country such as India is in any way contingent on the prior transfer of financial resources.
Additionally,
• We view the Government’s formulation and finalization of India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) and its eight missions as undemocratic and unilateral. The NAPCC does not question the current non-sustainable, high emissions pattern of economic development. Therefore the Government needs to arrive at a new NAPCC with reference to Parliament, in consultation with state and local governments, and through the widest possible participation of affected people. This must include differentiated eco-zone planning, district level vulnerability and contingency planning for disasters, industry-based reduction of emissions and people’s control mechanisms over the commons.
• Instead of addressing the crisis at its source, the Indian government is pushing for a series of non-solutions and false solutions towards mitigating emissions. Nuclear power is costly, risky, harms communities in the vicinity of uranium mines and nuclear plants and has significant embodied emissions. Agrofuels – which many state governments are promoting through jatropha plantations – take away land from food production, reduces access to the commons used by the poor and consumes enormous quantities of water. The hundreds of hydropower dams being planned and constructed across the Himalayan and other ecosystems, the Northeast region and elsewhere undermines the will of the local communities, and denies decentralized micro energy projects that would be more appropriate. Genetically Modified Organisms being proposed for mitigation and adaptation of cash and food crops will grossly undermine food security, biodiversity and cause unforeseen consequences along with deepening the control of multinationals over our food chain.
• We oppose both India’s position of ‘Compensated Conservation’ as part of the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) and its support for REDD. REDD and all other variants of carbon forestry encourage and promote the privatization and commodification of forests and their resources. There is the real danger that REDD will aggressively push a forced takeover of forest lands from communities by corporations and the Indian Forest Department. It will limit the access of forest people to their primary source of life and livelihood, who are already facing massive forced displacement in the name of ‘development’. REDD goes against people-centered forest governance, promotes the much opposed and discredited Joint Forest Management thereby undermining the recently enacted Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.
• Projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – of which India has about 1,200, both registered and under validation – prevents the physical and verifiable cuts in emissions that are so urgently needed, as does REDD. Carbon offsets perpetuate elite consumption in the misplaced hope that it can be compensated for. CDM in India is dominated by polluting industries that continue to harm communities and ecosystems, emit toxic fly ash and carbon, pollute rivers and underground aquifers. Corporations with bad environmental track records earn huge money through flimsy, non-verifiable and mostly false claims of emissions reductions.
• At the Bangkok UNFCCC meeting in September-October 2009, the US introduced a proposed structure for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of mitigation actions. It seeks to extend MRV to all countries except the least developed countries (LDCs). The word “commitment” in relation is absent in the US draft. We see this as an important shift in the language of global climate change agreement from binding commitments to that of mitigating “actions”. The Indian government should strongly oppose this watering down of the proposed regulatory mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol for developed economies.
WE DEMAND:
1. Given the increasing risk to life and life-support systems in the world, the Copenhagen Conference should declare a Global Climate Emergency.
2. A real and verifiable emission cut that is legally binding by the industrialized (Annex 1) countries of at least 50% by 2020, 70% by 2030 and 90% by 2050, over 1990 levels, and not left to voluntary “actions” of the industralised countries. The cuts should be within national borders, not offset through market and/or other mechanisms such as the CDM, and these cuts should start immediately.
3. The post-Kyoto process of collective negotiation needs to be strengthened, deepened and widened on the issue of cuts in greenhouse gases. This is being undermined by the industrialized nations, who are pushing for voluntary and individual national cuts. We demand that the baseline for emission cuts should be kept at the 1990 level as agreed.
4. Large emitters, including China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa, should rapidly shift away from their high-consumption and high-emission development trajectories, while promoting internal equity. They need to commit to necessary and binding reduction targets along with sharp cuts by Annex 1 countries. India should take the lead in building a consensus among developing economies to commit to mitigation targets, which should be binding through national legislation. In this context, the Government of India should reformulate the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 so as to incorporate the mitigation target based on a principle of democratic industrialization that ensures equity and social justice.
5. The Indian government should revise its unsustainable development trajectory of several decades. This phase has witnessed the exploitation of natural resources, the greater displacement of adivasis and other forest dwellers, intensified exploitation and continued pauperization of the urban poor, casualisation and contractualisation of labour, and the promotion of consumption by and production for elites. Such an anti-poor development trajectory — a trajectory reflected in the toothless Biodiversity Act 2002, the much-diluted EIA Notification, 2006, the industry-oriented National Environment Policy, 2006, the rampant violations of the CRZ Notification, and in the NAPCC and various missions under it — intrinsically leads to higher carbon emissions. We demand that emissions by elites in India be urgently brought down to 2.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita a year, thus enforcing equality and equity in resource-sharing by all Indians, and which is the maximum the Earth can currently absorb. At the same time we note that the working poor in the country are forced to consume much less than required for their well-being. Their consumption levels have to rise for them to have reasonable living standards and a life of dignity. We demand an effective framework that promotes the use of public transport alongside binding restrictions on the use of vehicles for private purposes, and one that prevents displacement of the poor in towns and cities. We demand that the livelihoods, constitutional and democratic rights of forest dwellers, fishworkers and small peasant cultivators be ensured.
6. The Indian Government should prepare a comprehensive policy for compensation of those affected by restructuring of the economy for emission cuts and arrive at an acceptable framework for re-employment of displaced workers.
7. Drastic cuts in defence expenditure, which is one of the largest consumers of energy, to promote peace in the region.
8. That the Indian government should redraw its energy strategy, moving towards more sustainable, equitable, employment and livelihood-generating renewable and bio-energy sources and strategies, in a time-bound manner. There needs to be a much more decentralized generation, transmission and use of energy. For renewable energy to be competitive and go beyond experimentation there has to be substantial government subsidy. India has vast resources of solar energy, which, if all past subsidies to conventional power and costs of mitigation of ill-effects are taken into account, becomes a cost competitive source of clean and renewable power. All this would necessitate a credible and transparent re-examination of the Electricity Act in all its ramifications.
9. The costs of mitigation and restructuring are paid for through direct investment by the government defined by the paramount principle of the public good.
10. Un-proven, anti-poor and potentially disastrous non-solutions, such as nuclear energy, agro-fuels, large hydro, CDM and hydrogen fuel should be immediately halted. A strict principle of “polluter pays” should be implemented for costing and comparing various energy options. The government must cease to be party to any disastrous market-based solutions like carbon trading.
11. We call for a new National Action Plan on Climate Change that will be arrived at after a wide consultation of people and be sanctioned by parliament.
12. We oppose any attempt to link climate change commitments to trade barriers and tariffs. The Indian government should desist from and oppose any such moves.
13. That the Government of India support the payment of ecological debt — both for historical emissions and current adaptation — as a legally binding obligation of the industrialized nations to nations and peoples of the global South. Their ecological debt should include the complete restoration of territories, and recuperation of agriculture and ecosystems. We demand the creation of alternative funding mechanisms and flows that recognize this ecological debt and respect, protect and promote the sovereignty and rights of nations and people. We demand an immediate end to any role for the World Bank and other international financial institutions (IFIs) in climate financing and to the tied use of technology to any debt repayment.
14. Our government must stand united with and protective of progressive efforts of other developing countries, G-77, the least developed countries (LDCs) and the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS). We oppose the reported moves by the Indian government to align with the United States, historically by far the largest greenhouse emitter.
The Indian government must take leadership of the countries of the global South in Copenhagen and beyond, by bringing issues of justice and equity in all their dimensions to the centrestage in climate negotiations. These need to be informed by the principle of ecological sustainability, and need to transcend barriers of generations and species and ensure rights of nations and peoples.
Copies to:
Minister of Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh
Members of Parliament
Members of PM’s Advisory Council on Climate Change
ENDORSED BY
Organisations:
1. New Trade Union Initiative (NTUI)
2. National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM)
3. National Forum of Forest Peoples and Forest Workers (NFFPFW)
4. National Fishworkers’ Forum (NFF)
5. National Adivasi Alliance
6. Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF)
7. South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP)
8. Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (KSMTF)
9. Programme for Social Action (PSA)
10. Delhi Forum
11. Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha (BJVJ)
12. South Asian Dialogue on Ecological Democracy (SADED)
13. Vettiver Collective, Chennai
14. Delhi Platform
15. Focus on the Global South
16. Pasumai Thaayagam, Tamil Nadu
17. Science for Society, Bihar
18. Socialist Front
19. Partners in Justice concerns (PJC-India)
20. Indian Network on Ethics and Climate Change (INECC)
21. Environment Support Group
22. Intercultural Resources
23. All India Forum for Right to Education
24. Equations
25. Nadi Ghati Morcha, Chhattisgarh
26. India FDI Watch
27. Indian Association for Volunteer Effort
28. Coorg Organisation for Rural Development
29. Popular Education and Action Centre (PEACE)
30. Kabani, Kerala
31. Thanal, Kerala
32. Kerala Tourism Watch
33. India FDI Watch
34. RTI Watch – India
35. Rural Volunteers’ Centre, Assam
36. River Basin Friends
37. Kaimur Kshetra Mahila Mazdoor Kisan Sangarsh Samiti, Uttar Pradesh
38. POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti, Orissa
39. Human Rights Law Centre, Robertsganj, UP
40. Niyamgiri Surakshya Manch, Orissa
41. Ma Mati Mahila Manch, Nayagarh, Orissa
42. UP Bhoomi Sudhar Avem Sharm Adikhar Samiti
43. Kriti, New Delhi
44. WaterWatch Alliance
45. Darshan, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
46. SICHREM - South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring, Bangalore
47. Deccan Development Society, Hyderabad
48. North Eastern Social Research Centre, Guwahati
49. South Against Genetic Engineering
50. Nepal Bhasha Bhashi Sangh
51. Andhra Pradesh Adivsi Aikya Vedika
52. Environics Trust, India
53. AP Alliance for Food Sovereignty
54. EKTA (Committee for Communal Amity), Mumbai
55. Tamilnadu Women's Collective
56. Institute of Alternative Approach to Development, Mahubani, Bihar
57. Millet Network of India
58. The Socialist Front, India
59. Delhi Patrakar Chaupal
60. Tamilnadu Resource Team
61. Lokayan, New Delhi
62. Prayavaranmitra, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
63. Kalanjium Unorganised Worker's Union, TN
64. Sahajeevan, Andhra Pradesh
65. Bombay Sarvodaya Friendship Centre
66. Shaheen Women Resource & Welfare Association, Hyderabad
67. Kalanjium Women Farmer's Association, TN
68. Movement Against Uranium Projects, (MAUP) Hyderabad
69. Sashipada Bandyopadhayay Resource Centre, Kolkatta
70. South Asia Forum for Human Rights (SAFHR)
71. International Presentation Association, India
72. Jamia Teacher’s Solidarity Association, New Delhi
73. People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR, Delhi)
74. Housing and Land Rights Network – India
75. MATU people’s organisation, Uttarakhand
76. CACIM (India Institute for Critical Action: Centre in Movement)
77. Navachethana, Kerala
78. Lokayat, Pune, Maharashtra
79. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, New Delhi
80. Nagarik Mancha, Kolkatta
81. Kisaan Panchayat
82. Sheep and Goat Rearers Sanghams of Medak and Chittor Districts, AP
83. Janaswarth Surakshya Parisad, Cuttack, Orissa
84. Lok Adhikar Manch, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
85. Centre for Sustainable-use of Natural and Social Resources, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
86. Chanchal Jana Kalyan Samity, Malda (West Bengal)
87. Moving Republic, Bangalore, Karnataka
88. Jyoti Mahila Samity, Bhubaneshwar Orissa
89. Orissa Human Rights Forum, Bhadrakh District,Orissa
90. Ganjam Jilla Adivasi Manch, Ganjam, Orissa
91. Global Alternate Information Applications (GAIA) Thrissur, Kerala
92. Center for Contemporary Studies & Research, Lucknow, UP
93. Samvedan Sanskritik Manch, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
94. LOK MANCH, Aurangabad, Bihar
95. Center for Social Initiatives, Gorakhpur, UP
96. Burma Centre Delhi (BCD)
97. ViBGYOR film Collective , Thrissur, Kerala
98. Centre for Education and Documentation
99. Friends, Varanasi, UP
100. Wada Trust, Sitapur, UP
101. Abdul Kalam Azad Jan Sewa Sansthan, Gazipur UP
102. Society for Integrated Development of Farming Community, Allahabad UP
103. Gramin Vikas Sansthan, Bahraich, UP
104. Dynamic Action Group, Lucknow, UP
105. Center for Policy Analysis, Lucknow, UP
106. Kisan Morcha, Bikaner, Rajasthan
107. IFFTU, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan
108. Arya Bheel Khand Rajya Morcha, Udaipur, Rajasthan
109. Matsya Mewat Shiksha Vikas Sansthan (MMSVS), Alwar, Rajasthan
110. Roopankan, Indore, Madhya Pradesh
111. Hamari Yamuna Charitable Trust, Delhi
112. Dalit Sena, Jodhpur, Rajasthan
113. KDRF, Bharatpur, Rajasthan
114. Youth Front, Pali, Rajasthan
115. Mahila Morcha, Banswara, Rajasthan
116. Chetna Sansthan, Dausa, Rajasthan
117. Dalit Women Forum, Secunderabad, AP
118. SRAVANTHI, Chittor, AP
119. YATRA, Kasargod, Kerala
120. Thope Poura Samity, Thriuvananthapuram , Kerala
121. Vikom Muhama Basheer Smarakkala Vayanasala, Kottayam, Kerala
122. Navajyothy Sangam, Kollam, Kerala
123. Society for Economic and Environmental Development (SEED), Kerala
124. Jana Sevakandra, Mammattikananam, Kerala
125. Rural Education & Development Society [REDSM], Kollam, Kerala
126. DAWN, Kottarakkara, Kerala
127. Bombay Urban Industrial League for Development (BUILD)
128. Focus Orissa-Forum On Climate Change
129. Peoples Institute for Development & Training (PIDT)
130. DICE Foundation, Nagaland
131. RCPDS (Resource Centre for participatory Development Studies), TN
132. SPEECH (Society for Peoples Education and Economic Change), TN
133. SAFE-CR (Southern Alliance for Ensuring Child Rights), TN
134. CLGC (Cluster Level Governing Council), TN
135. Penngal Kootamaipu, TN
136. Forum of collective forms of Cooperation (FCFC)
137. Society for Participatory Action and reflection (SPAR)
138. Agragati
139. Orissa Development Action Forum (ODAF)
140. Integrated Rural Development of weaker sections in India (IRDWSI), Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa
141. Centre for Research on New International Economic Order (CReNIEO), Tamilnadu and Orissa
142. Gram Vikas (GV), Orissa
143. Antyodaya Chetana Mandal (ACM), Orissa
144. Tagore Society for Rural Development (TSRD), Orissa and WB
145. Seva Bharati (SB), Orissa
146. Socio Economic Development Programme (SEDP), Orissa and WB
147. Council of Professional Social Workers (CPSW), Orissa
148. People's Institute for Participatory Action Research (PIPAR), Orissa
149. Samajika Parivartana Vikas Kendra (SPVK), Orissa
150. Rural Action for Development (RAD), Orissa
151. Samajika Vikas Kendram (SVK), Orissa
152. Odisha Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan (OAAA), Orissa
153. Adivasi Bikash Parisad, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
154. Ho Munda Bhasa Bikash Manch, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
155. Gana Chetana Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
156. Anchalik Jungle Surakshya Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
157. Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan Mayurbhanj, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
158. Jahar Surkshya Manch, Rasgovindpur, Kaptipada, Orissa
159. Balmianni Kutomi, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
160. Saura Adivasi Ahikar Abhijan, Nuagada, Gajpati, Orissa
161. Kuvi Bdayu , Bandhugaon, Koraput, Orissa
162. Loko Unnayan Sangh (LUS), Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
163. Kuvi Kulomi, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
164. Sajukodi Dhorti Surkhya Porisod, Semiliguda, Koraput, , Orissa
165. Deo-mali Mahila Sangh, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
166. Ancholiko Unnayan Sangh, Dasmonthpur, Koraput, , Orissa
167. Ancholiko Vikas Parisad, Pottangi, Koraput, , Orissa
168. Kasti Dakua Adivasi Mohasangha, Nuagaon, Nayagarh, Orissa
169. Ganglamaa Vikash Manch, Korkunda, Malkangiri, Orissa
170. Anchalika Adivasi Unnayan Parishad, Hindol, Dhenkanal, Orissa
171. Ancholia Unnayan Parishad, Phiringia, Kandhamal, Orissa
172. Zailaitmu, Tumdibandh, Kotagarh, Kandhamal, , Orissa
173. Pahadi Sangrami Manch, Kandhamal, Orissa
174. Sahaya, Kandhamal, Orissa
175. Mukti Sanghthan (The male member’s organisation), Dhenkanal, Orissa
176. Shakti Sangthan (The women member’s organisation), Dhenkanal, Orissa
177. Adivasi Dalit Adhikar Abhijan Manch, Pallahara, Anugul, Orissa
178. Malaygiri Bikash Manch, Anugul, Keonjhar, , Orissa
179. Gramanchal Bikash Parisad, Anugul, Keonjhar, Orissa
180. Anchalik Bikash Parisad, Anugul, Orissa
181. Niyamgiri Surkshya Manch, Kalahandi, Orissa
182. Gram Sahajog, Kalahandi, Orissa
183. Nari Bikash-Women Organisation, Lanjigarh, Kalahandi, Orissa
184. Adivasi Chetona Manch, Kalahandi, Orissa
185. Jungle Jivan Surakshya Parisad, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
186. Adishakti Lokbikash Sangthan, Patrapur, Gajpati, Orissa
187. Project level committee, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
188. Munigiri Gana Sangthan, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
189. Mahendragiri Adivasi Adhikar Samiti, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
190. Rusimal Anchalik Unnayan Parishad, Daringbadi, Kondhmal, Orissa
191. Aman, Uttarakhand
192. Citizens Global Platform, India
193. Bharatiya Krishak Samaj
194. Alternatives Asia
195. DK Parisarasaktara Okkuta, Mangalore, Karnataka
Individuals:
196. Dr John Dayal, Member, National Integration Council & Secretary general, All India Christian Council
197. Aashish Gupta, Researcher, Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai
198. Cynthia CJ
199. Dr. Anil Sadgopal
200. Vinod Raina
201. Prakash C. Jha
202. C. Indira Dasgupta
203. Suresh Bhat B. Member, PUCL, Dakshina Kannada (Karnataka)
204. Srihari Dukkipati - AID India
205. Birinder Pal Singh, Punjabi University, Patiala, Pujab
206. Keya Acharya, Journalist, Bangalore
207. Luit Goswami
208. Dr. Ashok Kundapur, Ph.D., International Solar Cooker Expert, Karnataka
209. Leena Padam, Jamui, Bihar
www.saded.in/Copenhagen/Climate%2520J... - Cached - Similar
Rail Demand Memorandum to PM on 3rd feb'09 Dharana in front of ECOR, Bhubaneswar
Dear Friends,
Today, a Dharana cum meeting was organized under the presidentship of Er. Lalit Mohan Pattnaik, Working President of Agami Odisha in front of East Coast Rail Bhawan, Bhubaneswar in demand of Completion of all ongoing Rail Project in Orissa and sanction of Khandhamal Rail Link. The Dharana was organised on behalf of AGAMI ODISHA, SWABHIMAN ODISHA MUNCH, LOKASAMUKHYA, FOCUS ORISSA AND KHURDHA-BOLANGIR RAIL LINE KRIYANUSTHAN COMMITTEE.
Sri Sibaji Pattnaik, Ex MP, Sri Dhannda Misra, Sri Babani Satpathy from Bolangir, Gadadhar Rout from Khurdha, Asish Kanungo, Asst Secy. CPI, Biswanath Mohapatra from Khurdha, Salila Mohapatra, Rajkishore, Janabani from Kandhamal, Jogendra Naik from Daspalla, Sidhartha from Puri, Bichitra Badajena from Utkal Sameelani, Prasanta Mohapatra, Manoj Jena from Binoba Seva Pratisthan & Madhu Bhai from National Youth Project raised their voice against step motherly attitude of Railway Board to wards Orissa Rail Projects.
A delegation of 5 member under the Presidentship of Er. Lalit Pattnaik including Sri Sibaji Pattnaik, Sri Bhabani Satpathy, Sri Dhananda Misra & Janabadi Bhoi submitted a memorandum to Prime Minister (below ) through Chief Engineer Rail Project of ECOR in the premises of ECOR Head Office . The Chief Engineer assured to immediately forward the letter to New delhi with their point to point answer on the subject demand.
Please highlight the issue for the interest of Orissa and Chatishgara, that has much less Rail density.
To, Date- 3rd February 2009
Honorable
Prime minister of India ,
South Block, Raisina Hill, New Delhi, India-110 011.
Fax: 91-11-23019545 / 91-11-23016857.
Respected Sir,
We the people of different regions of Orissa have gathered in front of East Cost Railway Office, Bhubaneswar to-day to protest against step-motherly attitude of Railway board towards different projects of Orissa. We request you to kindly study our grievances.
Kandhamal & Kalahandi-Balangir- Koraput (KBK) region in Orissa is a multi-facet backward region due to hilly backwardness, tribal populated backwardness and backward due to natural calamities.
Similar backward regions in India like North Eastern States have received special treatment by railway board where as KBK region has been neglected since decades. Even hilly region like Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand have received special package in railway by Govt. of India. Unfortunately, KBK region where backwardness is multi-facet has not received similar treatment.
The railway infrastructure in Orissa and Chhatisgarh is substantially low compared to national average despite both the states are in the profit making zones, where as railway infrastructure of Bihar , and West Bengal are remarkably high though they are in the loss making zones (North Eastern, and Easter zones).
East Coast zone and South Eastern zone (under which Orisss state comes) and South East Central zone (under which Chhatisgarh state comes) of Indian railways are top most profit making zones and large amount profit made by Indian railway comes from the royalty of transporting coal, metals, ores, and minerals which Orissa and Chhatisgarh substantially contribute, however, Indian railway has ignored Orissa, specially KBK region, since decades.
Politically, Indian railway was being always misused by railway ministry and development in the important backward but profit making states like Orissa and Chhatisgarh was being marginalized.
For example, Khurdha road ����alangir and Lanjigarh road ����unagarh railway lines in Orissa which were approved much earlier than Muzaffarpur ����itamari and Sultangang-Deogarh railway lines in Bihar, are only 10% completed where as both above projects in Bihar are completed by now.
During last 15 years, more lines were approved in Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and West Bengal (all of them comes under loss making zones) than Orissa and Chhatisgarh (both are in profit making zones). Even 3 railway plants in Bihar (loss making zone) and one in Kerala (another loss making zone) were established by Indian railway, but none of the plant, even the power plant by Indian railway, was established in Orissa or Chhatisgarh despite profit making zones and rich in coal.
Since decades, the funds allotted in the railway budgets to profit making zones like East Coast railway and South East Central zone is lower or same as that of loss making zones like Eastern railway, North Eastern railway and Southern railway zones.
We do not have any objection to the development of railway infrastructure in Bihar , West Bengal and other states in India rather would like to see their well being, but we are totally against the marginalization of Indian railway towards backward region like KBK and Chhatisgarh.
Some Facts
Average rail density for India is 19.13.
The rail density is highest in Delhi (138.2) followed by West Bengal (43.4), Punjab (41.6), Haryana (36.1), Bihar (35.9), Uttar Pradesh (35.8), Tamil Nadu (32.1), Assam (31.9), Kerala (27), Gujarat (26.9) ,Jharkhand (24.3) and Orissa (14.6),
ECOR has 4% of IR's tracks
7+% of IR's earnings in 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05
15+%, 20+% and 27+% of IR's profit in 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05
Gross Earnings and Profit
2008-2009 (budget): 6034.11 crores and 3653.34 crores
2007-2008: 5482.59 crores and 3368.20 crores
2006-2007: 4425.18 crores and 2067.71 crores
2005-2006: 3934.04 crores and 1809.98 crores
2004-2005: 3312.71 crores and 1261.39 crores
The profit mostly comes from transporting minerals available in the Adivasi districts of Orissa, AP and Chhatisgarh . Some of it should be ploughed back to those districts!
We propose to declare all the railway projects in KBK and bordering Chhatisgarh and Andhra Pradesh as national projects in the line of North Easter states, and
Our Demand
The KBK+ districts of Orissa and adjacent districts in Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh are the other frontier of India: among the most backward, inaccessible, tribal, extremist infested, and the farthest away from mainstream India. Khandhamal people have been isolated from the main stream of Orissa because of lack of connectivity. The district is full of Hills and does not have multiple entries and absolutely no Rail Links.
1. Sanction a Kandhamal Rail Link.
2. Railways must connect these areas during the 11th plan. In particular,
a. Khurda Rd ����alangir
b. Naupada-Gunupur-Therubali
c. Lanjigarh Rd ���▇awanipatna-Junagarh-Nabrangpur-Jeypore-Malkangiri
d. Talcher-Bimlagarh
e. Bangiriposi-Gurumahisasini and/or Buramara-Chakulia
3. Railways must convert Mancheswar Coach Repair factory to a Coach Manufacturing Factory or sanction a Coach factory in KBK District.
4. EAST COAST ZONE BHUBANESWAR
�屆� Inclusion of Kharagpur OR Chakradharpur Division
�屆� Rourkela and Rayagada are to be declared as Divisions.
�屆� All places of mineral reservoirs of Orissa should be included in ECOR.
�屆� A zonal Railway Hospital at Bhubaneswar is established.
�屆� Orissa as a whole should remain in East Coast Zone.
�屆� Supervisors and below workers appointment from Orissa only.
We Hope justice will be done through your intervention.
Thanking You,
Yours,
Truly,
People of Orissa.
Yours,
Lalit Pattnaik,
Working President, Agami Odisha &
Convener of Dharana on behalf of Agami odisha,
Swabhiman Odisha Munch,Loksamukhy,
Focus Orissa and Khurdha-Bolangir Rail Line Kriyanusthan Committee.
Er. Lalit Pattnaik
http://orissa-network.ning.com/profile/ErLalitPattnaik
http://ngo.adivasis.com/2009/02/rail-demand-memorandum-to-pm-on-3rd.html
Today, a Dharana cum meeting was organized under the presidentship of Er. Lalit Mohan Pattnaik, Working President of Agami Odisha in front of East Coast Rail Bhawan, Bhubaneswar in demand of Completion of all ongoing Rail Project in Orissa and sanction of Khandhamal Rail Link. The Dharana was organised on behalf of AGAMI ODISHA, SWABHIMAN ODISHA MUNCH, LOKASAMUKHYA, FOCUS ORISSA AND KHURDHA-BOLANGIR RAIL LINE KRIYANUSTHAN COMMITTEE.
Sri Sibaji Pattnaik, Ex MP, Sri Dhannda Misra, Sri Babani Satpathy from Bolangir, Gadadhar Rout from Khurdha, Asish Kanungo, Asst Secy. CPI, Biswanath Mohapatra from Khurdha, Salila Mohapatra, Rajkishore, Janabani from Kandhamal, Jogendra Naik from Daspalla, Sidhartha from Puri, Bichitra Badajena from Utkal Sameelani, Prasanta Mohapatra, Manoj Jena from Binoba Seva Pratisthan & Madhu Bhai from National Youth Project raised their voice against step motherly attitude of Railway Board to wards Orissa Rail Projects.
A delegation of 5 member under the Presidentship of Er. Lalit Pattnaik including Sri Sibaji Pattnaik, Sri Bhabani Satpathy, Sri Dhananda Misra & Janabadi Bhoi submitted a memorandum to Prime Minister (below ) through Chief Engineer Rail Project of ECOR in the premises of ECOR Head Office . The Chief Engineer assured to immediately forward the letter to New delhi with their point to point answer on the subject demand.
Please highlight the issue for the interest of Orissa and Chatishgara, that has much less Rail density.
To, Date- 3rd February 2009
Honorable
Prime minister of India ,
South Block, Raisina Hill, New Delhi, India-110 011.
Fax: 91-11-23019545 / 91-11-23016857.
Respected Sir,
We the people of different regions of Orissa have gathered in front of East Cost Railway Office, Bhubaneswar to-day to protest against step-motherly attitude of Railway board towards different projects of Orissa. We request you to kindly study our grievances.
Kandhamal & Kalahandi-Balangir- Koraput (KBK) region in Orissa is a multi-facet backward region due to hilly backwardness, tribal populated backwardness and backward due to natural calamities.
Similar backward regions in India like North Eastern States have received special treatment by railway board where as KBK region has been neglected since decades. Even hilly region like Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand have received special package in railway by Govt. of India. Unfortunately, KBK region where backwardness is multi-facet has not received similar treatment.
The railway infrastructure in Orissa and Chhatisgarh is substantially low compared to national average despite both the states are in the profit making zones, where as railway infrastructure of Bihar , and West Bengal are remarkably high though they are in the loss making zones (North Eastern, and Easter zones).
East Coast zone and South Eastern zone (under which Orisss state comes) and South East Central zone (under which Chhatisgarh state comes) of Indian railways are top most profit making zones and large amount profit made by Indian railway comes from the royalty of transporting coal, metals, ores, and minerals which Orissa and Chhatisgarh substantially contribute, however, Indian railway has ignored Orissa, specially KBK region, since decades.
Politically, Indian railway was being always misused by railway ministry and development in the important backward but profit making states like Orissa and Chhatisgarh was being marginalized.
For example, Khurdha road ����alangir and Lanjigarh road ����unagarh railway lines in Orissa which were approved much earlier than Muzaffarpur ����itamari and Sultangang-Deogarh railway lines in Bihar, are only 10% completed where as both above projects in Bihar are completed by now.
During last 15 years, more lines were approved in Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and West Bengal (all of them comes under loss making zones) than Orissa and Chhatisgarh (both are in profit making zones). Even 3 railway plants in Bihar (loss making zone) and one in Kerala (another loss making zone) were established by Indian railway, but none of the plant, even the power plant by Indian railway, was established in Orissa or Chhatisgarh despite profit making zones and rich in coal.
Since decades, the funds allotted in the railway budgets to profit making zones like East Coast railway and South East Central zone is lower or same as that of loss making zones like Eastern railway, North Eastern railway and Southern railway zones.
We do not have any objection to the development of railway infrastructure in Bihar , West Bengal and other states in India rather would like to see their well being, but we are totally against the marginalization of Indian railway towards backward region like KBK and Chhatisgarh.
Some Facts
Average rail density for India is 19.13.
The rail density is highest in Delhi (138.2) followed by West Bengal (43.4), Punjab (41.6), Haryana (36.1), Bihar (35.9), Uttar Pradesh (35.8), Tamil Nadu (32.1), Assam (31.9), Kerala (27), Gujarat (26.9) ,Jharkhand (24.3) and Orissa (14.6),
ECOR has 4% of IR's tracks
7+% of IR's earnings in 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05
15+%, 20+% and 27+% of IR's profit in 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05
Gross Earnings and Profit
2008-2009 (budget): 6034.11 crores and 3653.34 crores
2007-2008: 5482.59 crores and 3368.20 crores
2006-2007: 4425.18 crores and 2067.71 crores
2005-2006: 3934.04 crores and 1809.98 crores
2004-2005: 3312.71 crores and 1261.39 crores
The profit mostly comes from transporting minerals available in the Adivasi districts of Orissa, AP and Chhatisgarh . Some of it should be ploughed back to those districts!
We propose to declare all the railway projects in KBK and bordering Chhatisgarh and Andhra Pradesh as national projects in the line of North Easter states, and
Our Demand
The KBK+ districts of Orissa and adjacent districts in Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh are the other frontier of India: among the most backward, inaccessible, tribal, extremist infested, and the farthest away from mainstream India. Khandhamal people have been isolated from the main stream of Orissa because of lack of connectivity. The district is full of Hills and does not have multiple entries and absolutely no Rail Links.
1. Sanction a Kandhamal Rail Link.
2. Railways must connect these areas during the 11th plan. In particular,
a. Khurda Rd ����alangir
b. Naupada-Gunupur-Therubali
c. Lanjigarh Rd ���▇awanipatna-Junagarh-Nabrangpur-Jeypore-Malkangiri
d. Talcher-Bimlagarh
e. Bangiriposi-Gurumahisasini and/or Buramara-Chakulia
3. Railways must convert Mancheswar Coach Repair factory to a Coach Manufacturing Factory or sanction a Coach factory in KBK District.
4. EAST COAST ZONE BHUBANESWAR
�屆� Inclusion of Kharagpur OR Chakradharpur Division
�屆� Rourkela and Rayagada are to be declared as Divisions.
�屆� All places of mineral reservoirs of Orissa should be included in ECOR.
�屆� A zonal Railway Hospital at Bhubaneswar is established.
�屆� Orissa as a whole should remain in East Coast Zone.
�屆� Supervisors and below workers appointment from Orissa only.
We Hope justice will be done through your intervention.
Thanking You,
Yours,
Truly,
People of Orissa.
Yours,
Lalit Pattnaik,
Working President, Agami Odisha &
Convener of Dharana on behalf of Agami odisha,
Swabhiman Odisha Munch,Loksamukhy,
Focus Orissa and Khurdha-Bolangir Rail Line Kriyanusthan Committee.
Er. Lalit Pattnaik
http://orissa-network.ning.com/profile/ErLalitPattnaik
http://ngo.adivasis.com/2009/02/rail-demand-memorandum-to-pm-on-3rd.html
Joint Memo to GoI on UNFCCC’s Copenhagen Conference=MEMORANDUM TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ON THE UNFCCC’s 15th CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES AT COPENHAGEN
http://ntui.org.in/alliances/climate-crisis/memo-to-goi-on-unfcccs-copenhagen-conference-/
Joint Memo to GoI on UNFCCC’s Copenhagen Conference
MEMORANDUM TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ON THE UNFCCC’s 15th CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES AT COPENHAGEN
8th December 2009
Dear Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,
We, the undersigned people’s organisations, social movements, trade unions and concerned citizens, submit this memorandum to the Government to draw your attention to the several urgent and so far unaddressed concerns about the climate crisis and the Indian Government’s response to them, especially in light of the upcoming 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at Copenhagen from 7-18 December 2009.
We believe that the economic and political issues of inequality, both within and between nations, grievously impact distribution and consumption and are at the core of the crisis of global warming and of responding meaningfully to it. The crisis is also about a few usurping the rights and access of the vast majority of the disempowered over the commons – air, water, land, minerals and forests. Unsustainable economic development and inequitable growth based on an economy dependent on the use of fossil-fuels and extractive industries — which intensified in the last 60 years — have led to the sharp rise in carbon emissions, way beyond what the Earth can absorb. The global annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have reached about 35 billion tonnes a year from the burning of coal, oil and gas, and from deforestation. This is much more than the net absorption capacity of the Earth, estimated to be 16-17 billion tonnes a year or roughly 2.5 tonnes per person, which is declining due to a gradual warming of the oceans.
Hence, there is an extremely urgent need to make sharp and immediate cuts in the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). We fear that this urgency has not been reflected in the ongoing negotiations leading up to Copenhagen, neither in the Indian government’s position and policy interventions, nor in the positions of governments worldwide. The urgency stems from the fact that scientific evidence suggests we may already be close to significant tipping points in some of the Earth’s major ecosystems. Crossing a tipping point — whereby natural systems deteriorate even without any further human intervention — will make it that much more difficult for us to collectively intervene in halting possibly runaway global warming. We need to make drastic cuts in emissions, starting immediately. Anything less or watered down at Copenhagen will have massive consequences for humanity and for other species.
INDIA IS IN THE FRONTLINE OF CLIMATE VULNERABILITY
Climate change has become a serious threat to the poor, particularly in developing countries. Impacts are going to get unavoidably worse, with massive disruption and loss of human life and of other species that invisibly support our ecosystems. In India, widespread and significant impacts of climate change have been noticed for at least 10-15 years in many regions. These impacts are adversely affecting the urban working poor, the lives and livelihoods of the Himalayan and other hill people, fishing communities and other coastal and island communities, small, marginal and rainfed farmers and agricultural labourers, dalits, women, adivasis, forest dwellers, and other disadvantaged and marginalised communities in different regions. Published scientific evidence and other observations of people from different communities reveal that the following are some of the major impacts that are already visible:
* Changing rainfall patterns, reduced rains in July and in winter, shorter south-west monsoon, and intense rains in a short period. This is hurting both small agriculture and water sources and causing unprecedented floods and soil erosion in some places.
* In the mid-level Himalayas, reduced snow at mid- to high altitudes, warmer winters, shifting of fruits and crops to higher levels, spread of mosquitoes and vector-borne disease to new areas, drying up of streams, disappearance of small glaciers and receding of large glaciers.
* The spread and intensification of drought in large parts of India leading to massive forced migration, agrarian distress and mass abandoning of livestock.
* In forest areas, the migration of species to higher altitudes, the loss of biodiversity, the greater incidence of pests, increased growth of weeds, greater frequency of forest fires, the decline in stock of certain medicinal plants, and reduced growth of forests and grasslands.
* The drying of water sources that supply water for drinking and for livelihoods at many places.
* Sea level rise along many coastlines, depletion and migration of fish stocks, and ingress of saline water
due to storm surges.
These impacts influence and aggravate a range of other crises with systemic roots, for example the agrarian crisis. It is widely accepted by scientists that the impacts are going worsen further, and will happen simultaneously, hitting the poor in different regions.
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA’S POSITION
The Indian Government’s stand on climate change needs to reflect this urgency. It should affirm the principles of equity, justice and sustainability as essential for effective global and national policy towards climate change governed through a democratic and participatory regulatory mechanism.
Our views on the GOI’s stand in key areas in the climate negotiations are as follows:
1. Mitigation: The Government’s stand that India’s per capita emissions are low and it will “not allow its per capita GHG emissions to exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries” (The Road to Copenhagen, MEA, GOI, 2009) is nothing but hiding behind the poor and is potentially dangerous because it will worsen the climate crisis in the long run. India’s average emissions are relatively low for the time being because of the abysmal poverty of the overwhelming majority of this country; in contrast, the elites in this country have emissions approaching European levels. India needs to adopt and push for equity internally on a per capita emissions basis, the same principle it is arguing for in international negotiations. India’s energy policy for the foreseeable future is based on polluting fossil fuels, driven by a model of industrialization directed primarily at elite consumption. This needs to drastically decrease and therefore a complete rethink of our energy policy is essential.
2. Adaptation: The Government’s claim that it is spending “up to 2.5% of GDP on adaptation” is an accounting sleight of hand. The 2009-10 Budget documents reveal that much of the increase in expenditure for the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) and the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) is being accounted for as Adaptation Funds. On the other hand, crucial areas for adaptation such as mangrove conservation, wetlands conservation,
protection of rivers and other groundwater recharging systems, afforestation, methods of cultivation such as the system of rice intensification and organic farming and the biodiversity conservation programme have received scant attention and meagre allocations. Also, the shocking lack of prior information, preparedness and action regarding several disasters such as the recent drought, Krishna basin floods and the Aila disaster in the Sunderbans indicate that much more needs to be done and with greater urgency. Unavoidable worsening impacts suggest that they need to be anticipated and prepared for in advance.
3. Technology: Any technology transfer negotiated as part of the Copenhagen process should be free of conditionalities and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) restrictions. We need to ensure that we adopt solution-based technologies rather than technology-driven solutions. The belief that large technologies will provide the solution evades the centrality of the need to reduce elite consumption, in India and the world. It brings in large capital and takes solutions out of people’s hands. We urge the adoption of decentralized, small and sustainable technologies that are appropriate for people’s needs. Many such
technologies and materials already exist and need to be examined and improved upon before we venture into blind import of technology.
4. Finance: We support the stand proposed by the Bolivian government that industrialized countries should pay for their enormous historical emission and adaptation debts to the developing world, including India and the Indian poor. Any financial transfer mechanism and its ultimate use needs to be transparent, decentralized, democratic and decided by the people at all levels – through participation in consultation with national, state and local self-governments. However, we do not believe that
adaptation and basic technology implementation in a large developing country such as India is in any way contingent on the prior transfer of financial resources.
Additionally,
* We view the Government’s formulation and finalization of India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) and its eight missions as undemocratic and unilateral. The NAPCC does not question the current non-sustainable, high emissions pattern of economic development. Therefore the Government needs to arrive at a new NAPCC with reference to Parliament, in consultation with state and local governments, and through the widest possible participation of affected people. This must
include differentiated eco-zone planning, district level vulnerability and contingency planning for disasters, industry-based reduction of emissions and people’s control mechanisms over the commons.
* Instead of addressing the crisis at its source, the Indian government is pushing for a series of nonsolutions and false solutions towards mitigating emissions. Nuclear power is costly, risky, harms communities in the vicinity of uranium mines and nuclear plants and has significant embodied emissions. Agrofuels – which many state governments are promoting through jatropha plantations – take away land from food production, reduces access to the commons used by the poor and consumes
enormous quantities of water. The hundreds of hydropower dams being planned and constructed across the Himalayan and other ecosystems, the Northeast region and elsewhere undermines the will of the local communities, and denies decentralized micro energy projects that would be more appropriate.
Genetically Modified Organisms being proposed for mitigation and adaptation of cash and food crops will grossly undermine food security, biodiversity and cause unforeseen consequences along with deepening the control of multinationals over our food chain.
* We oppose both India’s position of ‘Compensated Conservation’ as part of the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) and its support for REDD. REDD and all other variants of carbon forestry encourage and promote the privatization and commodification of forests and their resources. There is the real danger that REDD will aggressively push a forced takeover of forest lands from communities by corporations and the Indian Forest Department. It will limit the access of forest people to their primary source of life and livelihood, who are already facing massive forced displacement in the name of ‘development’. REDD goes against people-centered forest governance, promotes the much opposed and discredited Joint Forest Management thereby undermining the recently enacted Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.
* Projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – of which India has about 1,200, both registered and under validation – prevents the physical and verifiable cuts in emissions that are so urgently needed, as does REDD. Carbon offsets perpetuate elite consumption in the misplaced hope that it can be compensated for. CDM in India is dominated by polluting industries that continue to harm communities and ecosystems, emit toxic fly ash and carbon, pollute rivers and underground aquifers.
Corporations with bad environmental track records earn huge money through flimsy, non-verifiable and mostly false claims of emissions reductions.
* At the Bangkok UNFCCC meeting in September-October 2009, the US introduced a proposed structure for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of mitigation actions. It seeks to extend MRV to all countries except the least developed countries (LDCs). The word “commitment” in relation is absent in the US draft. We see this as an important shift in the language of global climate change agreement from binding commitments to that of mitigating “actions”. The Indian government should strongly oppose this watering down of the proposed regulatory mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol for developed economies.
WE DEMAND:
1. Given the increasing risk to life and life-support systems in the world, the Copenhagen Conference should declare a Global Climate Emergency.
2. A real and verifiable emission cut that is legally binding by the industrialized (Annex 1) countries of at least 50% by 2020, 70% by 2030 and 90% by 2050, over 1990 levels, and not left to voluntary “actions” of the industralised countries. The cuts should be within national borders, not offset through market and/or other mechanisms such as the CDM, and these cuts should start immediately.
3. The post-Kyoto process of collective negotiation needs to be strengthened, deepened and widened on the issue of cuts in greenhouse gases. This is being undermined by the industrialized nations, who are pushing for voluntary and individual national cuts. We demand that the baseline for emission cuts should be kept at the 1990 level as agreed.
4. Large emitters, including China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa, should rapidly shift away from their high-consumption and high-emission development trajectories, while promoting internal equity. They need to commit to necessary and binding reduction targets along with sharp cuts by Annex 1 countries. India should take the lead in building a consensus among developing economies to commit to mitigation targets, which should be binding through national legislation. In this context, the
Government of India should reformulate the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 so as to incorporate the mitigation target based on a principle of democratic industrialization that ensures equity and social justice.
5. The Indian government should revise its unsustainable development trajectory of several decades. This phase has witnessed the exploitation of natural resources, the greater displacement of adivasis and other forest dwellers, intensified exploitation and continued pauperization of the urban poor, casualisation and contractualisation of labour, and the promotion of consumption by and production for elites. Such an anti-poor development trajectory — a trajectory reflected in the toothless Biodiversity Act 2002, the much-diluted EIA Notification, 2006, the industry-oriented National Environment Policy, 2006, the rampant violations of the CRZ Notification, and in the NAPCC and various missions under it — intrinsically leads to higher carbon emissions. We demand that emissions by elites in India be urgently brought down to 2.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita a year, thus enforcing equality and equity in resource-sharing by all Indians, and which is the maximum the Earth can currently absorb. At the same time we note that the working poor in the country are forced to consume much less than required for their well-being. Their consumption levels have to rise for them to have reasonable living standards and a life of dignity. We demand an effective framework that promotes the use of public transport alongside binding restrictions on the use of vehicles for private purposes, and one that prevents displacement of the poor in towns and cities. We demand that the livelihoods, constitutional and democratic rights of forest dwellers, fishworkers and small peasant cultivators be ensured.
6. The Indian Government should prepare a comprehensive policy for compensation of those affected by restructuring of the economy for emission cuts and arrive at an acceptable framework for reemployment of displaced workers.
7. Drastic cuts in defence expenditure, which is one of the largest consumers of energy, also to promote peace in the region.
8. That the Indian government should redraw its energy strategy, moving towards more sustainable, equitable, employment and livelihood-generating renewable and bio-energy sources and strategies, in a time-bound manner. There needs to be a much more decentralized generation, transmission and use of energy. For renewable energy to be competitive and go beyond experimentation there has to be substantial government subsidy. India has vast resources of solar energy, which, if all past subsidies to conventional power and costs of mitigation of ill-effects are taken into account, becomes a cost competitive source of clean and renewable power. All this would necessitate a credible and transparent re-examination of the Electricity Act in all its ramifications.
9. The costs of mitigation and restructuring are paid for through direct investment by the government defined by the paramount principle of the public good.
10. Un-proven, anti-poor and potentially disastrous non-solutions, such as nuclear energy, agro-fuels, large hydro, CDM and hydrogen fuel should be immediately halted. A strict principle of “polluter pays” should be implemented for costing and comparing various energy options. The government must cease to be party to any disastrous market-based solutions like carbon trading.
11. We call for a new National Action Plan on Climate Change that will be arrived at after a wide consultation of people and be sanctioned by parliament.
12. We oppose any attempt to link climate change commitments to trade barriers and tariffs. The Indian government should desist from and oppose any such moves.
13. That the Government of India support the payment of ecological debt — both for historical emissions and current adaptation — as a legally binding obligation of the industrialized nations to nations and peoples of the global South. Their ecological debt should include the complete restoration of territories, and recuperation of agriculture and ecosystems. We demand the creation of alternative funding mechanisms and flows that recognize this ecological debt and respect, protect and promote the
sovereignty and rights of nations and people. We demand an immediate end to any role for the World Bank and other international financial institutions (IFIs) in climate financing and to the tied use of technology to any debt repayment.
14. The Government should implement the Directive Principle as enshrined in the Constitution of India and make sure that citizen’s income parity and ratio is maintained at the minimum level of 1:10, thus ensuring equity and balanced lifestyles within the country.
15. Our government must stand united with and protective of progressive efforts of other developing countries, G-77, the least developed countries (LDCs) and the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS). We oppose the reported moves by the Indian government to align with the United States, historically by far the largest greenhouse emitter.
The Indian government must take leadership of the countries of the global South in Copenhagen and beyond, by bringing issues of justice and equity in all their dimensions to the centrestage in climate negotiations. These need to be informed by the principle of ecological sustainability, and need to transcend barriers of generations and species and ensure rights of nations and peoples. Equity holds the key to sustainability.
Copies to:
* Minister of Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh
* Members of Parliament
* Members of PM’s Advisory Council on Climate Change
ENDORSED BY
Organisations:
1. Abdul Kalam Azad Jan Sewa Sansthan, Gazipur UP
2. Adishakti Lokbikash Sangthan, Patrapur, Gajpati, Orissa
3. Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan Mayurbhanj, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
4. Adivasi Bikash Parisad, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
5. Adivasi Chetona Manch, Kalahandi, Orissa
6. Adivasi Dalit Adhikar Abhijan Manch, Orissa
7. Agragati
8. All India Forum for Right to Education
9. Alternatives Asia
10. Aman, Uttarakhand
11. Anchalik Bikash Parisad, Orissa
12. Anchalik Jungle Surakshya Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
13. Anchalika Adivasi Unnayan Parishad, Orissa
14. Ancholia Unnayan Parishad, Orissa
15. Ancholiko Unnayan Sangh, Dasmonthpur, Koraput, , Orissa
16. Ancholiko Vikas Parisad, Pottangi, Koraput, , Orissa
17. Andhra Pradesh Adivasi Aikya Vedika
18. Andhra Pradesh Alliance for Food Sovereignty
19. Antyodaya Chetana Mandal (ACM), Orissa
20. Arya Bheel Khand Rajya Morcha, Udaipur, Rajasthan
21. Balmianni Kutomi, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
22. Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha (BJVJ)
23. Bharatiya Krishak Samaj
24. Bombay Sarvodaya Friendship Centre
25. Bombay Urban Industrial League for Development (BUILD)
26. Burma Centre Delhi (BCD)
27. CACIM (India Institute for Critical Action: Centre in Movement)
28. Center for Contemporary Studies & Research, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
29. Center for Policy Analysis, Lucknow, UP
30. Center for Social Initiatives, Uttar Pradesh
31. Centre for Education and Documentation
32. Centre for Research on New International Economic Order, Tamilnadu and Orissa
33. Centre for Sustainable-use of Natural and Social Resources, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
34. Chanchal Jana Kalyan Samity, West Bengal
35. Chetna Sansthan, Dausa, Rajasthan
36. Citizens Global Platform, India
37. CLGC (Cluster Level Governing Council), Tamil Nadu
38. Coorg Organisation for Rural Development
39. Council of Professional Social Workers (CPSW), Orissa
40. Dalit Sena, Jodhpur, Rajasthan
41. Dalit Women Forum, Secunderabad, AP
42. Darshan, Gujarat
43. DAWN, Kottarakkara, Kerala
44. Deccan Development Society, Hyderabad
45. Delhi Forum
46. Delhi Patrakar Chaupal
47. Delhi Platform
48. Deo-mali Mahila Sangh, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
49. DICE Foundation, Nagaland
50. DK Parisarasaktara Okkuta, Mangalore, Karnataka
51. Dynamic Action Group
52. EKTA (Committee for Communal Amity), Mumbai
53. Environics Trust, India
54. Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
55. Environment Support Group
56. Equations
57. Focus on the Global South
58. Focus Orissa-Forum On Climate Change
59. Forum of collective forms of Cooperation (FCFC)
60. Friends, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh
61. Gana Chetana Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
62. Ganglamaa Vikash Manch, Orissa
63. Ganjam Jilla Adivasi Manch, Ganjam, Orissa
64. Ghar Bachao Ghar Banao Andolan, Maharshtra
65. Global Alternate Information Applications (GAIA) Thrissur, Kerala
66. Gram Sahajog, Kalahandi, Orissa
67. Gram Vikas (GV), Orissa
68. Gramanchal Bikash Parisad, Orissa
69. Gramin Vikas Sansthan, Uttar Pradesh
70. Hamari Yamuna Charitable Trust, Delhi
71. Ho Munda Bhasa Bikash Manch, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
72. Housing and Land Rights Network – India
73. Human Rights Law Centre, Robertsganj, Uttar Pradesh
74. IFFTU, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan
75. India FDI Watch
76. Indian Association for Volunteer Efforts
77. Indian Network on Ethics and Climate Change (INECC)
78. Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF)
79. Institute of Alternative Approach to Development, Bihar
80. Integrated Rural Development of Weaker sections in India, TN, AP and Orissa
81. Intercultural Resources
82. International Presentation Association, India
83. Jahar Surkshya Manch, Rasgovindpur, Kaptipada, Orissa
84. Jamia Teacher’s Solidarity Association, New Delhi
85. Jana Sevakandra, Mammattikananam, Kerala
86. Janaswarth Surakshya Parisad, Cuttack, Orissa
87. Jungle Jivan Surakshya Parisad, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
88. Jyoti Mahila Samity, Bhubaneshwar Orissa
89. Kabani, Kerala
90. Kaimur Kshetra Mahila Mazdoor Kisan Sangarsh Samiti, Uttar Pradesh
91. Kalanjium Unorganised Worker’s Union, Tamil Nadu
92. Kalanjium Women Farmer’s Association, TN
93. Kalpavriksh
94. Kasti Dakua Adivasi Mohasangha, Nuagaon, Nayagarh, Orissa
95. KDRF, Bharatpur, Rajasthan
96. Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (KSMTF)
97. Kerala Tourism Watch
98. Kisaan Panchayat
99. Kisan Morcha, Bikaner, Rajasthan
100. Kriti, New Delhi
101. Kuvi Bdayu , Bandhugaon, Koraput, Orissa
102. Kuvi Kulomi, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
103. Lok Adhikar Manch, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
104. LOK MANCH, Aurangabad, Bihar
105. Lokayan, New Delhi
106. Lokayat, Pune, Maharashtra
107. Loko Unnayan Sangh (LUS), Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
108. Ma Mati Mahila Manch, Nayagarh, Orissa
109. Maharashtra Macchimar Kruti Samiti, Maharashtra
110. Mahendragiri Adivasi Adhikar Samiti, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
111. Mahila Morcha, Banswara, Rajasthan
112. Malaygiri Bikash Manch, Orissa
113. Matsya Mewat Shiksha Vikas Sansthan (MMSVS), Alwar, Rajasthan
114. MATU people’s organisation, Uttarakhand
115. Millet Network of India
116. Movement Against Uranium Projects, (MAUP) Hyderabad
117. Moving Republic, Bangalore, Karnataka
118. Mukti Sanghthan, Orissa
119. Munigiri Gana Sangthan, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
120. Nadi Ghati Morcha, Chhattisgarh
121. Nagarik Mancha, Kolkatta
122. Nari Bikash-Women Organisation, Lanjigarh, Kalahandi, Orissa
123. Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA)
124. National Adivasi Alliance
125. National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM)
126. National Fishworkers’ Forum (NFF)
127. National Forum of Forest Peoples and Forest Workers (NFFPFW)
128. Navachethana, Kerala
129. Navajyothy Sangam, Kollam, Kerala
130. Nepal Bhasha Bhashi Sangh
131. New Trade Union Initiative (NTUI)
132. Niyamgiri Surakshya Manch, Orissa
133. Niyamgiri Surkshya Manch, Orissa
134. North Eastern Social Research Centre, Guwahati
135. Odisha Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan (OAAA), Orissa
136. Orissa Development Action Forum (ODAF)
137. Orissa Human Rights Forum, Bhadrakh District,Orissa
138. Pahadi Sangrami Manch, Orissa
139. Partners in Justice concerns (PJC-India)
140. Pasumai Thaayagam, Tamil Nadu
141. Penngal Kootamaipu, Tamil Nadu
142. People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR, Delhi)
143. Peoples Institute for Development & Training (PIDT)
144. People’s Institute for Participatory Action Research (PIPAR), Orissa
145. Popular Education and Action Centre (PEACE)
146. POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti, Orissa
147. Prayavaranmitra, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
148. Programme for Social Action (PSA)
149. Project level committee, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
150. RCPDS (Resource Centre for participatory Development Studies), Tamil Nadu
151. Right to Information Watch – India
152. River Basin Friends
153. Roopankan, Indore, Madhya Pradesh
154. Rural Action for Development (RAD), Orissa
155. Rural Education & Development Society [REDSM], Kollam, Kerala
156. Rural Volunteers’ Centre, Assam
157. Rusimal Anchalik Unnayan Parishad, Daringbadi,Orissa
158. SAFE-CR (Southern Alliance for Ensuring Child Rights), Tamil Nadu
159. Sahajeevan, Andhra Pradesh
160. Sahaya, Kandhamal, Orissa
161. Sajukodi Dhorti Surkhya Porisod, Semiliguda, Koraput, , Orissa
162. Samajika Parivartana Vikas Kendra (SPVK), Orissa
163. Samajika Vikas Kendram (SVK), Orissa
164. Samvedan Sanskritik Manch, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
165. Sashipada Bandyopadhayay Resource Centre, Kolkatta
166. Saura Adivasi Ahikar Abhijan, Nuagada, Orissa
167. Science for Society, Bihar
168. Seva Bharati (SB), Orissa
169. Shaheen Women Resource & Welfare Association, Hyderabad
170. Shakti Sangthan, Orissa
171. Sheep and Goat Rearers Sanghams of Medak and Chittor Districts, AP
172. SICHREM – South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring, Bangalore
173. Socialist Front
174. Society for Economic and Environmental Development (SEED), Kerala
175. Society for Integrated Development of Farming Community, Allahabad UP
176. Society for Participatory Action and reflection (SPAR)
177. Socio-Economic Development Programme (SEDP), Orissa and WB
178. South Against Genetic Engineering
179. South Asia Forum for Human Rights (SAFHR)
180. South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP)
181. South Asian Dialogue on Ecological Democracy (SADED)
182. SPEECH (Society for Peoples Education and Economic Change), Tamil Nadu
183. SRAVANTHI, Chittor, Andhra Pradesh
184. Tagore Society for Rural Development (TSRD), Orissa and WB
185. Tamilnadu Resource Team
186. Tamilnadu Women’s Collective
187. Thanal, Kerala
188. The Socialist Front, India
189. Thope Poura Samity, Thriuvananthapuram , Kerala
190. Uttar Pradesh Bhoomi Sudhar Avem Sharm Adikhar Samiti
191. Vaikom Muhama Basheer Smarakkala Vayanasala,Kerala
192. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, New Delhi
193. Vettiver Collective, Chennai
194. ViBGYOR film Collective , Kerala
195. Wada Trust, Sitapur, UP
196. WaterWatch Alliance
197. YATRA, Kasargod, Kerala
198. Youth Front, Pali, Rajasthan
199. Zailaitmu, Orissa
Individuals:
1. Aashish Gupta, Researcher, Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai
2. Birinder Pal Singh, Punjab University
3. C. Indira Dasgupta
4. Cynthia CJ
5. Dr John Dayal, Member, National Integration Council & All India Christian Council
6. Dr. Anil Sadgopal
7. Dr. Ashok Kundapur, Solar Cooker Expert, Karnataka
8. Keya Acharya, Journalist, Bangalore
9. Leena Padam, Bihar
10. Luit Goswami
11. Prakash C. Jha
12. Srihari Dukkipati, Association for India’s Development
13. Suresh Bhat B. Member, Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, Karnataka
14. Vinod Raina
What We Do
* Building Trade Union Unity
o Rise Against Price Rise!
o SIGTUR IX Congress, Brazil 2010
o May Day 2010
o Statement of South Asian Trade Unions
o All-India Protest Day on 28 October 2009
o 2009 Joint Trade Union Letter to the Commerce Minister
o 3 September 2009 Joint Trade Union Media Release
o Joint India-Pakistan TU Statement on Terrorism in South Asia
o General Strike on 20 August 2008
o General Strike 14 December 2006
o Founding Conference Resolution No. 2
o General Strike on 29 September 2005
* Building Social Alliance for Labour
o Assembly of the Working People 2008
+ Workshops
# Women's Work
# Social Security
# Liberalisation and PSUs
# Struggle against Electricity Act 2003
# Public Distribution System
# Global Warming
+ Rallies
# Labour Rights
# Democratic Dissent
* Trade
o Forum Against FTAs
+ Handbill - 30 April 2010 Protest
+ Memorandum 30 April 2010
+ Background Note on Indian FTAs
o WTO
+ 2009 March to Parliament
+ 2 September 2009 Press Release
+ Call for mass mobilisation on 3 September 2009
+ 4 September Media Release
+ Press Coverage
* Democratic Industrialisation & Development
o Forest Rights
o Coastal Rights
o Displacement Struggles
* Peace & Democracy
o India Lifeline to Gaza
o An Assembly Towards a Union of South Asian Peoples
+ Delhi Declaration 2010
o Raipur Satyagraha
+ Release of Dr. Binayak Sen - A Step towards the Right to Democratic Dissent
+ Unlawful Arrest of Dr. Binayak Sen
o Trade Unions for Peace & Democracy
o Conference on War, Imperialism and Resistance
* Climate Crisis
o Issues Regarding Nuclear Energy Beyond the Liability Bill
o Joint Memo to GoI on UNFCCC’s Copenhagen Conference
o AWP Joint Workshop
o National Consultation in Ranchi
* Asia Floor Wage
New Trade Union Initiative
B-137, First Floor, Dayanand Colony | Lajpat Nagar - IV | New Delhi - 110024
Telephone
+91-11-2621 4538
Telefax
+91-11-2648 6931
Email
secretariat@ntui.org.in
Joint Memo to GoI on UNFCCC’s Copenhagen Conference
MEMORANDUM TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ON THE UNFCCC’s 15th CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES AT COPENHAGEN
8th December 2009
Dear Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,
We, the undersigned people’s organisations, social movements, trade unions and concerned citizens, submit this memorandum to the Government to draw your attention to the several urgent and so far unaddressed concerns about the climate crisis and the Indian Government’s response to them, especially in light of the upcoming 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at Copenhagen from 7-18 December 2009.
We believe that the economic and political issues of inequality, both within and between nations, grievously impact distribution and consumption and are at the core of the crisis of global warming and of responding meaningfully to it. The crisis is also about a few usurping the rights and access of the vast majority of the disempowered over the commons – air, water, land, minerals and forests. Unsustainable economic development and inequitable growth based on an economy dependent on the use of fossil-fuels and extractive industries — which intensified in the last 60 years — have led to the sharp rise in carbon emissions, way beyond what the Earth can absorb. The global annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have reached about 35 billion tonnes a year from the burning of coal, oil and gas, and from deforestation. This is much more than the net absorption capacity of the Earth, estimated to be 16-17 billion tonnes a year or roughly 2.5 tonnes per person, which is declining due to a gradual warming of the oceans.
Hence, there is an extremely urgent need to make sharp and immediate cuts in the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs). We fear that this urgency has not been reflected in the ongoing negotiations leading up to Copenhagen, neither in the Indian government’s position and policy interventions, nor in the positions of governments worldwide. The urgency stems from the fact that scientific evidence suggests we may already be close to significant tipping points in some of the Earth’s major ecosystems. Crossing a tipping point — whereby natural systems deteriorate even without any further human intervention — will make it that much more difficult for us to collectively intervene in halting possibly runaway global warming. We need to make drastic cuts in emissions, starting immediately. Anything less or watered down at Copenhagen will have massive consequences for humanity and for other species.
INDIA IS IN THE FRONTLINE OF CLIMATE VULNERABILITY
Climate change has become a serious threat to the poor, particularly in developing countries. Impacts are going to get unavoidably worse, with massive disruption and loss of human life and of other species that invisibly support our ecosystems. In India, widespread and significant impacts of climate change have been noticed for at least 10-15 years in many regions. These impacts are adversely affecting the urban working poor, the lives and livelihoods of the Himalayan and other hill people, fishing communities and other coastal and island communities, small, marginal and rainfed farmers and agricultural labourers, dalits, women, adivasis, forest dwellers, and other disadvantaged and marginalised communities in different regions. Published scientific evidence and other observations of people from different communities reveal that the following are some of the major impacts that are already visible:
* Changing rainfall patterns, reduced rains in July and in winter, shorter south-west monsoon, and intense rains in a short period. This is hurting both small agriculture and water sources and causing unprecedented floods and soil erosion in some places.
* In the mid-level Himalayas, reduced snow at mid- to high altitudes, warmer winters, shifting of fruits and crops to higher levels, spread of mosquitoes and vector-borne disease to new areas, drying up of streams, disappearance of small glaciers and receding of large glaciers.
* The spread and intensification of drought in large parts of India leading to massive forced migration, agrarian distress and mass abandoning of livestock.
* In forest areas, the migration of species to higher altitudes, the loss of biodiversity, the greater incidence of pests, increased growth of weeds, greater frequency of forest fires, the decline in stock of certain medicinal plants, and reduced growth of forests and grasslands.
* The drying of water sources that supply water for drinking and for livelihoods at many places.
* Sea level rise along many coastlines, depletion and migration of fish stocks, and ingress of saline water
due to storm surges.
These impacts influence and aggravate a range of other crises with systemic roots, for example the agrarian crisis. It is widely accepted by scientists that the impacts are going worsen further, and will happen simultaneously, hitting the poor in different regions.
THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA’S POSITION
The Indian Government’s stand on climate change needs to reflect this urgency. It should affirm the principles of equity, justice and sustainability as essential for effective global and national policy towards climate change governed through a democratic and participatory regulatory mechanism.
Our views on the GOI’s stand in key areas in the climate negotiations are as follows:
1. Mitigation: The Government’s stand that India’s per capita emissions are low and it will “not allow its per capita GHG emissions to exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries” (The Road to Copenhagen, MEA, GOI, 2009) is nothing but hiding behind the poor and is potentially dangerous because it will worsen the climate crisis in the long run. India’s average emissions are relatively low for the time being because of the abysmal poverty of the overwhelming majority of this country; in contrast, the elites in this country have emissions approaching European levels. India needs to adopt and push for equity internally on a per capita emissions basis, the same principle it is arguing for in international negotiations. India’s energy policy for the foreseeable future is based on polluting fossil fuels, driven by a model of industrialization directed primarily at elite consumption. This needs to drastically decrease and therefore a complete rethink of our energy policy is essential.
2. Adaptation: The Government’s claim that it is spending “up to 2.5% of GDP on adaptation” is an accounting sleight of hand. The 2009-10 Budget documents reveal that much of the increase in expenditure for the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) and the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) is being accounted for as Adaptation Funds. On the other hand, crucial areas for adaptation such as mangrove conservation, wetlands conservation,
protection of rivers and other groundwater recharging systems, afforestation, methods of cultivation such as the system of rice intensification and organic farming and the biodiversity conservation programme have received scant attention and meagre allocations. Also, the shocking lack of prior information, preparedness and action regarding several disasters such as the recent drought, Krishna basin floods and the Aila disaster in the Sunderbans indicate that much more needs to be done and with greater urgency. Unavoidable worsening impacts suggest that they need to be anticipated and prepared for in advance.
3. Technology: Any technology transfer negotiated as part of the Copenhagen process should be free of conditionalities and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) restrictions. We need to ensure that we adopt solution-based technologies rather than technology-driven solutions. The belief that large technologies will provide the solution evades the centrality of the need to reduce elite consumption, in India and the world. It brings in large capital and takes solutions out of people’s hands. We urge the adoption of decentralized, small and sustainable technologies that are appropriate for people’s needs. Many such
technologies and materials already exist and need to be examined and improved upon before we venture into blind import of technology.
4. Finance: We support the stand proposed by the Bolivian government that industrialized countries should pay for their enormous historical emission and adaptation debts to the developing world, including India and the Indian poor. Any financial transfer mechanism and its ultimate use needs to be transparent, decentralized, democratic and decided by the people at all levels – through participation in consultation with national, state and local self-governments. However, we do not believe that
adaptation and basic technology implementation in a large developing country such as India is in any way contingent on the prior transfer of financial resources.
Additionally,
* We view the Government’s formulation and finalization of India’s National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) and its eight missions as undemocratic and unilateral. The NAPCC does not question the current non-sustainable, high emissions pattern of economic development. Therefore the Government needs to arrive at a new NAPCC with reference to Parliament, in consultation with state and local governments, and through the widest possible participation of affected people. This must
include differentiated eco-zone planning, district level vulnerability and contingency planning for disasters, industry-based reduction of emissions and people’s control mechanisms over the commons.
* Instead of addressing the crisis at its source, the Indian government is pushing for a series of nonsolutions and false solutions towards mitigating emissions. Nuclear power is costly, risky, harms communities in the vicinity of uranium mines and nuclear plants and has significant embodied emissions. Agrofuels – which many state governments are promoting through jatropha plantations – take away land from food production, reduces access to the commons used by the poor and consumes
enormous quantities of water. The hundreds of hydropower dams being planned and constructed across the Himalayan and other ecosystems, the Northeast region and elsewhere undermines the will of the local communities, and denies decentralized micro energy projects that would be more appropriate.
Genetically Modified Organisms being proposed for mitigation and adaptation of cash and food crops will grossly undermine food security, biodiversity and cause unforeseen consequences along with deepening the control of multinationals over our food chain.
* We oppose both India’s position of ‘Compensated Conservation’ as part of the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) and its support for REDD. REDD and all other variants of carbon forestry encourage and promote the privatization and commodification of forests and their resources. There is the real danger that REDD will aggressively push a forced takeover of forest lands from communities by corporations and the Indian Forest Department. It will limit the access of forest people to their primary source of life and livelihood, who are already facing massive forced displacement in the name of ‘development’. REDD goes against people-centered forest governance, promotes the much opposed and discredited Joint Forest Management thereby undermining the recently enacted Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.
* Projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – of which India has about 1,200, both registered and under validation – prevents the physical and verifiable cuts in emissions that are so urgently needed, as does REDD. Carbon offsets perpetuate elite consumption in the misplaced hope that it can be compensated for. CDM in India is dominated by polluting industries that continue to harm communities and ecosystems, emit toxic fly ash and carbon, pollute rivers and underground aquifers.
Corporations with bad environmental track records earn huge money through flimsy, non-verifiable and mostly false claims of emissions reductions.
* At the Bangkok UNFCCC meeting in September-October 2009, the US introduced a proposed structure for measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of mitigation actions. It seeks to extend MRV to all countries except the least developed countries (LDCs). The word “commitment” in relation is absent in the US draft. We see this as an important shift in the language of global climate change agreement from binding commitments to that of mitigating “actions”. The Indian government should strongly oppose this watering down of the proposed regulatory mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol for developed economies.
WE DEMAND:
1. Given the increasing risk to life and life-support systems in the world, the Copenhagen Conference should declare a Global Climate Emergency.
2. A real and verifiable emission cut that is legally binding by the industrialized (Annex 1) countries of at least 50% by 2020, 70% by 2030 and 90% by 2050, over 1990 levels, and not left to voluntary “actions” of the industralised countries. The cuts should be within national borders, not offset through market and/or other mechanisms such as the CDM, and these cuts should start immediately.
3. The post-Kyoto process of collective negotiation needs to be strengthened, deepened and widened on the issue of cuts in greenhouse gases. This is being undermined by the industrialized nations, who are pushing for voluntary and individual national cuts. We demand that the baseline for emission cuts should be kept at the 1990 level as agreed.
4. Large emitters, including China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa, should rapidly shift away from their high-consumption and high-emission development trajectories, while promoting internal equity. They need to commit to necessary and binding reduction targets along with sharp cuts by Annex 1 countries. India should take the lead in building a consensus among developing economies to commit to mitigation targets, which should be binding through national legislation. In this context, the
Government of India should reformulate the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 so as to incorporate the mitigation target based on a principle of democratic industrialization that ensures equity and social justice.
5. The Indian government should revise its unsustainable development trajectory of several decades. This phase has witnessed the exploitation of natural resources, the greater displacement of adivasis and other forest dwellers, intensified exploitation and continued pauperization of the urban poor, casualisation and contractualisation of labour, and the promotion of consumption by and production for elites. Such an anti-poor development trajectory — a trajectory reflected in the toothless Biodiversity Act 2002, the much-diluted EIA Notification, 2006, the industry-oriented National Environment Policy, 2006, the rampant violations of the CRZ Notification, and in the NAPCC and various missions under it — intrinsically leads to higher carbon emissions. We demand that emissions by elites in India be urgently brought down to 2.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita a year, thus enforcing equality and equity in resource-sharing by all Indians, and which is the maximum the Earth can currently absorb. At the same time we note that the working poor in the country are forced to consume much less than required for their well-being. Their consumption levels have to rise for them to have reasonable living standards and a life of dignity. We demand an effective framework that promotes the use of public transport alongside binding restrictions on the use of vehicles for private purposes, and one that prevents displacement of the poor in towns and cities. We demand that the livelihoods, constitutional and democratic rights of forest dwellers, fishworkers and small peasant cultivators be ensured.
6. The Indian Government should prepare a comprehensive policy for compensation of those affected by restructuring of the economy for emission cuts and arrive at an acceptable framework for reemployment of displaced workers.
7. Drastic cuts in defence expenditure, which is one of the largest consumers of energy, also to promote peace in the region.
8. That the Indian government should redraw its energy strategy, moving towards more sustainable, equitable, employment and livelihood-generating renewable and bio-energy sources and strategies, in a time-bound manner. There needs to be a much more decentralized generation, transmission and use of energy. For renewable energy to be competitive and go beyond experimentation there has to be substantial government subsidy. India has vast resources of solar energy, which, if all past subsidies to conventional power and costs of mitigation of ill-effects are taken into account, becomes a cost competitive source of clean and renewable power. All this would necessitate a credible and transparent re-examination of the Electricity Act in all its ramifications.
9. The costs of mitigation and restructuring are paid for through direct investment by the government defined by the paramount principle of the public good.
10. Un-proven, anti-poor and potentially disastrous non-solutions, such as nuclear energy, agro-fuels, large hydro, CDM and hydrogen fuel should be immediately halted. A strict principle of “polluter pays” should be implemented for costing and comparing various energy options. The government must cease to be party to any disastrous market-based solutions like carbon trading.
11. We call for a new National Action Plan on Climate Change that will be arrived at after a wide consultation of people and be sanctioned by parliament.
12. We oppose any attempt to link climate change commitments to trade barriers and tariffs. The Indian government should desist from and oppose any such moves.
13. That the Government of India support the payment of ecological debt — both for historical emissions and current adaptation — as a legally binding obligation of the industrialized nations to nations and peoples of the global South. Their ecological debt should include the complete restoration of territories, and recuperation of agriculture and ecosystems. We demand the creation of alternative funding mechanisms and flows that recognize this ecological debt and respect, protect and promote the
sovereignty and rights of nations and people. We demand an immediate end to any role for the World Bank and other international financial institutions (IFIs) in climate financing and to the tied use of technology to any debt repayment.
14. The Government should implement the Directive Principle as enshrined in the Constitution of India and make sure that citizen’s income parity and ratio is maintained at the minimum level of 1:10, thus ensuring equity and balanced lifestyles within the country.
15. Our government must stand united with and protective of progressive efforts of other developing countries, G-77, the least developed countries (LDCs) and the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS). We oppose the reported moves by the Indian government to align with the United States, historically by far the largest greenhouse emitter.
The Indian government must take leadership of the countries of the global South in Copenhagen and beyond, by bringing issues of justice and equity in all their dimensions to the centrestage in climate negotiations. These need to be informed by the principle of ecological sustainability, and need to transcend barriers of generations and species and ensure rights of nations and peoples. Equity holds the key to sustainability.
Copies to:
* Minister of Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh
* Members of Parliament
* Members of PM’s Advisory Council on Climate Change
ENDORSED BY
Organisations:
1. Abdul Kalam Azad Jan Sewa Sansthan, Gazipur UP
2. Adishakti Lokbikash Sangthan, Patrapur, Gajpati, Orissa
3. Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan Mayurbhanj, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
4. Adivasi Bikash Parisad, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
5. Adivasi Chetona Manch, Kalahandi, Orissa
6. Adivasi Dalit Adhikar Abhijan Manch, Orissa
7. Agragati
8. All India Forum for Right to Education
9. Alternatives Asia
10. Aman, Uttarakhand
11. Anchalik Bikash Parisad, Orissa
12. Anchalik Jungle Surakshya Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
13. Anchalika Adivasi Unnayan Parishad, Orissa
14. Ancholia Unnayan Parishad, Orissa
15. Ancholiko Unnayan Sangh, Dasmonthpur, Koraput, , Orissa
16. Ancholiko Vikas Parisad, Pottangi, Koraput, , Orissa
17. Andhra Pradesh Adivasi Aikya Vedika
18. Andhra Pradesh Alliance for Food Sovereignty
19. Antyodaya Chetana Mandal (ACM), Orissa
20. Arya Bheel Khand Rajya Morcha, Udaipur, Rajasthan
21. Balmianni Kutomi, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
22. Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha (BJVJ)
23. Bharatiya Krishak Samaj
24. Bombay Sarvodaya Friendship Centre
25. Bombay Urban Industrial League for Development (BUILD)
26. Burma Centre Delhi (BCD)
27. CACIM (India Institute for Critical Action: Centre in Movement)
28. Center for Contemporary Studies & Research, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
29. Center for Policy Analysis, Lucknow, UP
30. Center for Social Initiatives, Uttar Pradesh
31. Centre for Education and Documentation
32. Centre for Research on New International Economic Order, Tamilnadu and Orissa
33. Centre for Sustainable-use of Natural and Social Resources, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
34. Chanchal Jana Kalyan Samity, West Bengal
35. Chetna Sansthan, Dausa, Rajasthan
36. Citizens Global Platform, India
37. CLGC (Cluster Level Governing Council), Tamil Nadu
38. Coorg Organisation for Rural Development
39. Council of Professional Social Workers (CPSW), Orissa
40. Dalit Sena, Jodhpur, Rajasthan
41. Dalit Women Forum, Secunderabad, AP
42. Darshan, Gujarat
43. DAWN, Kottarakkara, Kerala
44. Deccan Development Society, Hyderabad
45. Delhi Forum
46. Delhi Patrakar Chaupal
47. Delhi Platform
48. Deo-mali Mahila Sangh, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
49. DICE Foundation, Nagaland
50. DK Parisarasaktara Okkuta, Mangalore, Karnataka
51. Dynamic Action Group
52. EKTA (Committee for Communal Amity), Mumbai
53. Environics Trust, India
54. Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
55. Environment Support Group
56. Equations
57. Focus on the Global South
58. Focus Orissa-Forum On Climate Change
59. Forum of collective forms of Cooperation (FCFC)
60. Friends, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh
61. Gana Chetana Sangthan, Rasgovindpur, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
62. Ganglamaa Vikash Manch, Orissa
63. Ganjam Jilla Adivasi Manch, Ganjam, Orissa
64. Ghar Bachao Ghar Banao Andolan, Maharshtra
65. Global Alternate Information Applications (GAIA) Thrissur, Kerala
66. Gram Sahajog, Kalahandi, Orissa
67. Gram Vikas (GV), Orissa
68. Gramanchal Bikash Parisad, Orissa
69. Gramin Vikas Sansthan, Uttar Pradesh
70. Hamari Yamuna Charitable Trust, Delhi
71. Ho Munda Bhasa Bikash Manch, Kaptipada, Mayurbhanj, Orissa
72. Housing and Land Rights Network – India
73. Human Rights Law Centre, Robertsganj, Uttar Pradesh
74. IFFTU, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan
75. India FDI Watch
76. Indian Association for Volunteer Efforts
77. Indian Network on Ethics and Climate Change (INECC)
78. Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF)
79. Institute of Alternative Approach to Development, Bihar
80. Integrated Rural Development of Weaker sections in India, TN, AP and Orissa
81. Intercultural Resources
82. International Presentation Association, India
83. Jahar Surkshya Manch, Rasgovindpur, Kaptipada, Orissa
84. Jamia Teacher’s Solidarity Association, New Delhi
85. Jana Sevakandra, Mammattikananam, Kerala
86. Janaswarth Surakshya Parisad, Cuttack, Orissa
87. Jungle Jivan Surakshya Parisad, Umarkote, Nawarangpur, Orissa
88. Jyoti Mahila Samity, Bhubaneshwar Orissa
89. Kabani, Kerala
90. Kaimur Kshetra Mahila Mazdoor Kisan Sangarsh Samiti, Uttar Pradesh
91. Kalanjium Unorganised Worker’s Union, Tamil Nadu
92. Kalanjium Women Farmer’s Association, TN
93. Kalpavriksh
94. Kasti Dakua Adivasi Mohasangha, Nuagaon, Nayagarh, Orissa
95. KDRF, Bharatpur, Rajasthan
96. Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (KSMTF)
97. Kerala Tourism Watch
98. Kisaan Panchayat
99. Kisan Morcha, Bikaner, Rajasthan
100. Kriti, New Delhi
101. Kuvi Bdayu , Bandhugaon, Koraput, Orissa
102. Kuvi Kulomi, Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
103. Lok Adhikar Manch, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
104. LOK MANCH, Aurangabad, Bihar
105. Lokayan, New Delhi
106. Lokayat, Pune, Maharashtra
107. Loko Unnayan Sangh (LUS), Semiliguda, Koraput, Orissa
108. Ma Mati Mahila Manch, Nayagarh, Orissa
109. Maharashtra Macchimar Kruti Samiti, Maharashtra
110. Mahendragiri Adivasi Adhikar Samiti, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
111. Mahila Morcha, Banswara, Rajasthan
112. Malaygiri Bikash Manch, Orissa
113. Matsya Mewat Shiksha Vikas Sansthan (MMSVS), Alwar, Rajasthan
114. MATU people’s organisation, Uttarakhand
115. Millet Network of India
116. Movement Against Uranium Projects, (MAUP) Hyderabad
117. Moving Republic, Bangalore, Karnataka
118. Mukti Sanghthan, Orissa
119. Munigiri Gana Sangthan, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
120. Nadi Ghati Morcha, Chhattisgarh
121. Nagarik Mancha, Kolkatta
122. Nari Bikash-Women Organisation, Lanjigarh, Kalahandi, Orissa
123. Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA)
124. National Adivasi Alliance
125. National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM)
126. National Fishworkers’ Forum (NFF)
127. National Forum of Forest Peoples and Forest Workers (NFFPFW)
128. Navachethana, Kerala
129. Navajyothy Sangam, Kollam, Kerala
130. Nepal Bhasha Bhashi Sangh
131. New Trade Union Initiative (NTUI)
132. Niyamgiri Surakshya Manch, Orissa
133. Niyamgiri Surkshya Manch, Orissa
134. North Eastern Social Research Centre, Guwahati
135. Odisha Adivasi Adhikar Abhijan (OAAA), Orissa
136. Orissa Development Action Forum (ODAF)
137. Orissa Human Rights Forum, Bhadrakh District,Orissa
138. Pahadi Sangrami Manch, Orissa
139. Partners in Justice concerns (PJC-India)
140. Pasumai Thaayagam, Tamil Nadu
141. Penngal Kootamaipu, Tamil Nadu
142. People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR, Delhi)
143. Peoples Institute for Development & Training (PIDT)
144. People’s Institute for Participatory Action Research (PIPAR), Orissa
145. Popular Education and Action Centre (PEACE)
146. POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti, Orissa
147. Prayavaranmitra, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
148. Programme for Social Action (PSA)
149. Project level committee, Rayagada, Gajpati, Orissa
150. RCPDS (Resource Centre for participatory Development Studies), Tamil Nadu
151. Right to Information Watch – India
152. River Basin Friends
153. Roopankan, Indore, Madhya Pradesh
154. Rural Action for Development (RAD), Orissa
155. Rural Education & Development Society [REDSM], Kollam, Kerala
156. Rural Volunteers’ Centre, Assam
157. Rusimal Anchalik Unnayan Parishad, Daringbadi,Orissa
158. SAFE-CR (Southern Alliance for Ensuring Child Rights), Tamil Nadu
159. Sahajeevan, Andhra Pradesh
160. Sahaya, Kandhamal, Orissa
161. Sajukodi Dhorti Surkhya Porisod, Semiliguda, Koraput, , Orissa
162. Samajika Parivartana Vikas Kendra (SPVK), Orissa
163. Samajika Vikas Kendram (SVK), Orissa
164. Samvedan Sanskritik Manch, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
165. Sashipada Bandyopadhayay Resource Centre, Kolkatta
166. Saura Adivasi Ahikar Abhijan, Nuagada, Orissa
167. Science for Society, Bihar
168. Seva Bharati (SB), Orissa
169. Shaheen Women Resource & Welfare Association, Hyderabad
170. Shakti Sangthan, Orissa
171. Sheep and Goat Rearers Sanghams of Medak and Chittor Districts, AP
172. SICHREM – South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring, Bangalore
173. Socialist Front
174. Society for Economic and Environmental Development (SEED), Kerala
175. Society for Integrated Development of Farming Community, Allahabad UP
176. Society for Participatory Action and reflection (SPAR)
177. Socio-Economic Development Programme (SEDP), Orissa and WB
178. South Against Genetic Engineering
179. South Asia Forum for Human Rights (SAFHR)
180. South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP)
181. South Asian Dialogue on Ecological Democracy (SADED)
182. SPEECH (Society for Peoples Education and Economic Change), Tamil Nadu
183. SRAVANTHI, Chittor, Andhra Pradesh
184. Tagore Society for Rural Development (TSRD), Orissa and WB
185. Tamilnadu Resource Team
186. Tamilnadu Women’s Collective
187. Thanal, Kerala
188. The Socialist Front, India
189. Thope Poura Samity, Thriuvananthapuram , Kerala
190. Uttar Pradesh Bhoomi Sudhar Avem Sharm Adikhar Samiti
191. Vaikom Muhama Basheer Smarakkala Vayanasala,Kerala
192. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, New Delhi
193. Vettiver Collective, Chennai
194. ViBGYOR film Collective , Kerala
195. Wada Trust, Sitapur, UP
196. WaterWatch Alliance
197. YATRA, Kasargod, Kerala
198. Youth Front, Pali, Rajasthan
199. Zailaitmu, Orissa
Individuals:
1. Aashish Gupta, Researcher, Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai
2. Birinder Pal Singh, Punjab University
3. C. Indira Dasgupta
4. Cynthia CJ
5. Dr John Dayal, Member, National Integration Council & All India Christian Council
6. Dr. Anil Sadgopal
7. Dr. Ashok Kundapur, Solar Cooker Expert, Karnataka
8. Keya Acharya, Journalist, Bangalore
9. Leena Padam, Bihar
10. Luit Goswami
11. Prakash C. Jha
12. Srihari Dukkipati, Association for India’s Development
13. Suresh Bhat B. Member, Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, Karnataka
14. Vinod Raina
What We Do
* Building Trade Union Unity
o Rise Against Price Rise!
o SIGTUR IX Congress, Brazil 2010
o May Day 2010
o Statement of South Asian Trade Unions
o All-India Protest Day on 28 October 2009
o 2009 Joint Trade Union Letter to the Commerce Minister
o 3 September 2009 Joint Trade Union Media Release
o Joint India-Pakistan TU Statement on Terrorism in South Asia
o General Strike on 20 August 2008
o General Strike 14 December 2006
o Founding Conference Resolution No. 2
o General Strike on 29 September 2005
* Building Social Alliance for Labour
o Assembly of the Working People 2008
+ Workshops
# Women's Work
# Social Security
# Liberalisation and PSUs
# Struggle against Electricity Act 2003
# Public Distribution System
# Global Warming
+ Rallies
# Labour Rights
# Democratic Dissent
* Trade
o Forum Against FTAs
+ Handbill - 30 April 2010 Protest
+ Memorandum 30 April 2010
+ Background Note on Indian FTAs
o WTO
+ 2009 March to Parliament
+ 2 September 2009 Press Release
+ Call for mass mobilisation on 3 September 2009
+ 4 September Media Release
+ Press Coverage
* Democratic Industrialisation & Development
o Forest Rights
o Coastal Rights
o Displacement Struggles
* Peace & Democracy
o India Lifeline to Gaza
o An Assembly Towards a Union of South Asian Peoples
+ Delhi Declaration 2010
o Raipur Satyagraha
+ Release of Dr. Binayak Sen - A Step towards the Right to Democratic Dissent
+ Unlawful Arrest of Dr. Binayak Sen
o Trade Unions for Peace & Democracy
o Conference on War, Imperialism and Resistance
* Climate Crisis
o Issues Regarding Nuclear Energy Beyond the Liability Bill
o Joint Memo to GoI on UNFCCC’s Copenhagen Conference
o AWP Joint Workshop
o National Consultation in Ranchi
* Asia Floor Wage
New Trade Union Initiative
B-137, First Floor, Dayanand Colony | Lajpat Nagar - IV | New Delhi - 110024
Telephone
+91-11-2621 4538
Telefax
+91-11-2648 6931
secretariat@ntui.org.in
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)