Feminist Environmentalism and Governance in India

 Feminist Environmentalism and Governance in India

By Anasab Atiq

The climate debate dates back decades earlier with voices being echoed in Rio Summits, and Earth Summits back in the 1970s with a focus accrued to the inclusion of women; with the narrative transitioning to gender perspective; from a mere allusion and anathema to a canon. Eco feminist critique has seen its evolution from originating in the USA, extrapolating women’s environmental connection with ideological needs that are rooted in the reproductive biology of women & nature and the wider ontological process of cultural and psychological association with nature; to the material (economic and political)critique found statistically in the developing world; moving beyond Eco feminism, to feminist environmentalism as studied by Bina Agarwal. Although the neoliberal, colonialist narrative presupposed the extension of helping hand to the women in developing world through civil society and institutional actors like NGOs and the United Nations;  these reinforced the skulduggery that women as a whole complexed into a solidarity and solidity rather than exacerbated with gender, caste, class and ethical differentiation. This solitary and unsoiled approach has been further extended in research & mainstream development policies that have, albeit increasing the participation of gender in decision-making; has given rise to intersectional inequalities entrenched and dovetailed, in a tenaciously patriarchal setup of social integration. Before delving into the critique of policies, it is imperative to delve into the feminist critique and the methods that have been adopted to engender the approach. The rendition of the rhetoric of ‘Women in Development’ to ‘Gender in Development’, has had to pave a long way in ensuring that the power & political dynamics entrenched in the structural, organizational, and institutional nuances are represented in the policies, rather than assuming women to be the passive harbingers of action and solidarity & rendered passive receivers of schemes & subliminal aids. Although the classical Eco feminist critique placed women on the ideological pedestal, it hid the contours of intersectional appropriations within the local context which was substantiated, by the environmental feminism debate. The dependence of women on the environment is strictly not natural or ideological but rather political, rendered absolute through the gendered division of labor, necessitating women to indulge in a double whammy of performing traditional roles within the household but moving steps beyond; to ensure subsistence through forest collection, agricultures acuities, water availability etc. Hitherto, major stakeholders in environmental policy initiatives; due to lack of autonomy over land, income & market resources, the subjectivity of women's voices in decision-making have largely been diminutive. The governance initiatives, although acknowledging the disparities in reception versus attention, & have largely focused on providing chauvinistic fiscal aids without eliciting the response, knowledge, and intellect of local women. This lacuna is entrenching a vicious cycle of poverty that the women from marginalized communities are exposed to, when their understandings are not included in the rhetorics & executions. The UNDP for instance through its various developmental models in India, Bhutan & Nepal has substantiated this essentialism with statistical data to prove how the policies meant for women can fail, due to a lack of decision-making and reciprocal inclusion, autonomy, and agency  even within traditionally matrilineal societies like Bhutan. The environmental debates & the feminist movement have historically run on a symmetric & parallel symphony of voicing against the white supremacist, patriarchal control & access to, natural resources, and the forcing back of agency of gender to the ancillary background of gender theories, which is ideologically premised on Butler’s performative gender argument not only exclusive to men but rather based on the maneuvered idea of masculinity, flowing across all genders, class, castes, etc.

The coming out of women from the subliminal stalwart role of community build-up to community protection in movements like Chipko, Appiko, etc highlighted their inexorable role as actors rather than victims. But sidelining this idea has been a result of focussing on the ineluctable heroism rather than the necessitated push for women to have a communal control over the resonances within nature that required immediate attention for their subsistence of livelihood. The aggravating impacts of colonial and post-colonial laws on the rights of foresters, most of which was evident in the miles the workers had to cover, most of them women; in turn exaggerated the time and drudgery for collecting forest produce & water, etc, and the physical labor exerted, necessitating the rollout of girl children from schools into the fields. This, although mitigated through providing technocratic & technological assistance to the women, was not reflected in subsuming the existence of attrited social structures so much so that these entrenched gender disparities still exist & coexist with the contemporary laws of governance, with minuscule (although increased participation but not proportionate voices) changes brought about politically. This has given acclamation to the greater need for political governance besides the economic one, to tackle the preclusion that gender is homogenous, necessarily conscious towards empowerment &environment: a case in point being the polity of Darjeeling, with the inclusion of women in Gorkha Territorial Administration essentially and alluringly from the majority Gorkha community rather than Tibetan women or other minority ethnicities; them reinforcing & co-opting into the pre-existing power dynamism rather than alleviating those; Thusfore simmering down the neoliberal global mindset of conniving women to be a homogenous gender community without perceived, siloed intersects & power hunger. The recent acts of environmental governance, like the Forest Conservation Amendment Act 2023, have further derailed the voices of tribal people, rushing women back to the shackled fences. The environmental debate although gender-conscious has still fared poorly in ensuring that intersectional rights are included in policies and not only in research papers & theories. There is an overarching impetus for gender to be included qualitatively; beyond the notion of ‘critical mass’ to the notion of ‘vocal mass' where institutions and social barriers are upfronted, uprooted & uplifted to such an extent that the debates about agency & autonomy face beyond words into communal solidarity of genders. It's high time that the Damocles sword hanging over the status quo, guillotines the patriarchal juggernaut and alleviates gender from its Achilles heels of cross ethnic, class, and caste conflicts.

REFERENCES

Sharma, B., Banskota, K., & Luitel, S. (2005). Women, energy and water in the Himalaya:integration of women in planning and management – Policy guidelines.

Agarwal, B. (1992). The gender and environment debate: Lessons from India. Feminist Studies, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.2307/3178217

Joshi, D. (2014). Feminist solidarity? Women’s engagement in politics and the implications for water management in the Darjeeling Himalaya. Mountain Research and Development, 34(3), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-13-00097.1

Tyagi, N., & Das, S. (2017). Gender mainstreaming in forest governance: Analysing 25 years of research and policy in South Asia.

Shreshtha, G., Joshi, D., & Clement, F. (2019). Masculinities and hydropower in India: A feminist political ecology perspective.

K,ASHER .and G,VARLEY.2018. Gender in the jungle.