All Is Not Lost- Need is to Balance Tradition and Development.

 In the last two articles, I discussed about evolution of Ladakh from a happy traditional society to a typical struggling rural area in a third world nation, as described in the book ‘Ancient Futures’ by Helena Norberg Hodge. In this article, I shall talk about third i.e last part of the book where the author writes of ways of striking balance. In this segment, which she calls ‘Learning from Ladakh’, Ms Hodge talks in intricate detail about what she feels went wrong, a few ideas on how we can try to make things right and various projects and activities she carried out. All the approaches she suggests have resulted from her personal experiences during the extensive work she undertook and the time she spent in close relation with Ladakh.

Comparing the before and after scenarios in terms of a few major attributes, she says, “Many individual aspects of traditional culture were without a doubt far from ideal: there was lack of what we would consider basic comforts, like heating in the freezing winter temperatures.” She then goes on to talk about limited communication with the rest of the world, illiteracy, infant mortality and low life expectancy, things we would all consider problems. What makes this comparison disturbing yet interesting is when she explains how in the traditional Ladakhi society, these did not really appear as problems. And as we would agree, the traditional society, even with all its flaws and limitations, has proven to be far more sustainable, both socially and environmentally.

Viewing development in Ladakh from a bird’s eye view, she says, “It was only after several years that I began to piece individual instances together and see them as aspects of a single process: the systematic dismantling of Ladakhi culture. I began to see the minor incremental changes in everyday life – a new pair of shoes, a new concrete house – as a part of the bigger picture of economic dependence, cultural rejection, and environmental degradation. “

Does it mean that the fundamental concept of development is dubious? Are we all living a life of deception? Probably not. Why does development then seem to have done more harm than good? The problem as the author points out and I agree is with the idea of ‘monoculture’. Monoculture may be understood as ‘one size fits all’ approach towards development; judgements and conclusions being made using a single universally applicable Western yardstick; development being planned on the premise of rebuilding instead of redecoration. To state the author, “It was like starting from zero, as if there had been no infrastructure in Ladakh before development. It was as if there had been no medical care, no education, no communication, no transport or trade. Ladakh was being rebuilt according to Western guidelines – in tarmac, concrete and steel.” If we observe closely, most sub urban areas in different parts of our country were also basically being tore down and rebuilt as per the western guidelines. Furthermore, due to centralization, decision makers i.e the government officials and bureaucrats were usually not natives of the area in question, disabling them from considering area specific nuances before formulating any developmental policies.

Development as we talk about it today, is primarily dependent on the amount of money in rotation in an economy; Gross National Product (GNP) being used as a measure for the level of development. Contrastingly, in the traditional societies the usage of currency was mostly limited to purchase of luxuries. Each household was self - sufficient in few aspects and used barter as a system of exchange in the rest, to fulfil their basic needs. Today, exchange of one kind of goods or services for another would not be accounted for in GNP. As a result, even if the society was self - sufficient and prosperous, it would rank low on GNP indicators due to lesser exchange of money. As the author says, “The situation has become quite absurd: rather than eating potato grown in your own garden, it is better for the economy if you buy a potato grown on the other side of the country, which has been pulverized, freeze dried and reconstituted into brightly colored potato balls.”

 

As discussed in my last article, the western development model being referred to emphasized on commercial gain instead of human welfare. It was due to the greed for accumulation of maximum wealth, that we crossed that thin line between optimum utilization and exploitation of natural resources. We embarked on a journey full of manipulations with the natural world, assuming that science will somehow, as the author calls it ‘stretch the Earth’s bounty ad infinitum’.

So is all lost for mankind? Is there no path leading us to a world with lesser problems? Thankfully not. The key, as it appears to me, is finding ways to embrace the technological way of life while still being anchored to our traditional value system. And how do we know what the right mix of both worlds is? To answer that, the author introduces an incredible concept she calls ’counter development’. To quote, “The primary goal of counter development would be to provide people with the means to make fully informed choices about their own future.”

Elaborating on Counter Development, she advocates the usage of all possible means of communication to publicize the complete truth regarding capital and energy intensive methods of development. How, it is important to draw people’s attention towards the environmental damage being caused by the industrial way of life on one hand, and highlighting local sustainable alternatives which had been used traditionally, on the other, thus giving a more humane definition to progress. The core concept of counter development is to gain balance between the local and the global. In today’s scenario, most people would be aware of ‘the global’ but not a lot would know about ‘the local’. Thus the first step would be to educate people about ways of development based on local environmentally sustainable resources like the solar and wind energy as opposed to fossil fuels. This knowledge would trickle down, hopefully reaching to all segments of the society.

We, as parents and teachers bear more responsibility in such endeavors. It is our moral responsibility to provide our children a platform to explore and learn about the resources around us, enabling them to identify more viable ways of development. The problem even today is our inclination towards material gains more than a holistic life. Most of us would blabber about how we eat organic vegetables as they are healthier. But how many of us consider developing a kitchen garden, growing our own organic vegetables and sharing it with our neighbors and friends?

The act of balancing might appear very obvious and talked about, but sadly it mostly is in papers and not so much in action. We all agree that using bicycles or walking should be preferred mode of commuting, but how many of us actually put it into practice? Isn’t it time that we spoke about how the ‘industrially developed’ nations are now borrowing from our traditional culture. How they now prefer homeopathy, acupuncture and meditation as methods of wellness. Isn’t it time that we start living with and taking care of our parents and elders and experience the bliss of family ties. Isn’t it high time that we feel proud of a culture wealthy enough to nourish our souls.    

Talking about macro changes, Ms Hodge suggests a decentralized path of development for a more location specific growth. This would provide an opportunity for the localites to have a bigger say in the policies directly influencing their lives. This would make them feel empowered and prevent migration to urban areas for a better life, thus reinstating societal balance between families.

 

 

Moving on to the activities and projects, she mentions how the book ‘Small is Beautiful’ by economist E F Schumacher strengthened her conviction that development need not mean destruction and she began writing letters to the government to promote the use of renewable energy. Tapping solar energy was her obvious choice, as Ladakh receives more than three hundred days of sunlight. In 1978, after several meetings with the Indian Planning Commission, she received permission to organize a small pilot project to demonstrate solar technologies. Along with solar cookers and greenhouse, she made use of Tombre walls, a simple solar technology for heating houses. The Tombre wall proved ideal for Ladakh, keeping houses warm during winters and cool and comfortable during summer months with the system being easily adaptable to the traditional architecture and available materials. During her initial years, Ms Hodge used radio interviews and theatre to correct the faulty exaggerated image of the west in Ladakhi minds. With the help of her Ladakhi friends, local leaders and administration, she attempted to enlighten people about the importance of cultural self-respect and how even the westerners are moving towards pure wool over synthetic. She started travelling the world, conducting seminars and lectures particularly in Europe and North America, educating people about the social and ecological balance of traditional Ladakh and how conventional development was eroding it. In 1980, her activities grew into a small international organization called the Ladakh Project which became the International Society for Ecology and Culture in 1991. The organization as we may guess, seek to encourage a revisioning of progress towards more ecological and community based ways of living.   

In 1983, a group of concerned Ladakhis interested in exploring sustainable development path, officially registered as the Ladakh Ecological Development Group (LEDeG). The LEDeG along with ‘Ladakh Project’ developed and demonstrated a whole range of technologies including the Tombre wall, solar ovens for cooking rice, vegetables, bread & cakes, water heaters, greenhouses, hydraulic ram pumps, grain grinding mills, microhydro installations for domestic lighting, etc all making use of clean and renewable sources of energy. All the projects involved the participation of the beneficiaries, making them a part of the developmental process.

The LEDeG is headquartered in The Centre for Ecological Development in Leh and serves the purpose of drawing attention of policy makers as well as visitors from abroad towards the traditional Ladakhi culture. The visitors range from government officials, journalists, teachers, tourists and Ladakhi’s from all walks of life. To quote the author, “Here Ladakhis can meet foreign tourists face to face on equal terms. This facilitates real communication between the two cultures, demystifying the West and showing the Ladakhis how much value the foreigners attach not only to the traditional Ladakhi culture, but also the work we are doing.”

The LEDeG also works with the Student’s Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL). Founded in 1988, SECMOL seeks to involve young people in development and to explore alternatives to formal education. LEDeG has a broad educational based program that includes radio shows, publications, formal and informal meetings, workshops, seminars and conferences on various relevant topics. Special attention is given to women empowerment and communal harmony between Buddhist and Muslim communities in the area. Though the journey was definitely not a cake walk, Ms Hodge and her Ladakhi supporters did not give up. They were convinced of heading in the right direction and that their efforts will bear fruits and over the years, their work has expanded, giving them a clear indication of progress.   

To summarize, the book ‘Ancient Futures – Learning from Ladakh’ has given me an insight and hope of the possibility of seeing balanced world. It leaves me with a lingering feeling of overwhelming optimism of being able to contribute positively in building a more sustainable tomorrow.