Like water for justice☆
Introduction
Water and justice are thoroughly entangled and for very good reasons. Boelens (2014, p. 234) points out how ‘worldviews, water flows and water control practices are interwoven’ and ‘since ancient times… [demonstrate an] elite subjugation’. Farias (2011, p. 371) similarly notes that the social, economic and environmental ills relating to water are rooted in history, but argues that these injustices are essentially diverse, reflecting complex evolving ‘socio-material-political interminglings’. Sikor and Newell (2014) draw attention to the universal core issues of justice inherent in diverse environmental struggles, which, as they point out are nonetheless difficult to define in narrow terms and frameworks because of their temporal, spatial and other contextual specificities. This paper relates to the need to ‘critically interrogate the universalizing and globalizing tendencies in asserting and invocating environmental justice’ in the face of great plurality in perspectives, theories and practice (Sikor and Newell, 2014, p. 155).
This paper reflects on these contradictions taking the case of latent old and blatant new water injustices in Darjeeling district in the lower Teesta basin of the Eastern Himalaya. In conclusion, the paper analyses whether and how water injustices can be defined and pursued within narrow domains relating only to water, or even to certain sectors of water, when water wrongs are essentially complex and riveted in nested political, social, economic injustices (see Map 1).
Darjeeling district, which is located in the State of West Bengal in India has been embroiled in over four decades of a contentious conflict for a political separation from West Bengal through the creation of a new state, Gorkhaland. Wenner (2013) articulately describes the multiple dimensions of the conflict as a strategic construction of an “imaginative geography”. Ethnic tensions are claimed between a minority Nepali community in a majority Bengali populace of the State of West Bengal. The Nepalis of Darjeeling (incidentally a majority community within the district) express a commonly-held perception that they are stigmatized by the rest of India as being from Nepal, not fully Indian citizens (Wenner, 2013). There is also antagonism relating to an economic and development neglect by the West Bengal administration, post-independence. The conflict is popularly presented by local politicians as a ‘“mato ka prashna” (the land/identity question)’, an outcome of a tyrannical control of local land, water, forest resources by an outsider alien Bengali dominated State of West Bengal (Sarkar, 2010, p. 114). A separate state of Gorkhaland is thus presented as a panacea to all forms of wrongs and injustice prevalent in the region. However, as I will describe below, while a tyrannical “alien” State is readily blamed, the Gorkhaland conflict appears to reproduce principles of the coercive State in a region that is criss-crossed by historical and ethno-political injustices (Wenner, 2013, Chettri, 2013).
Local politicians point to the enduring water supply crisis as a key marker of the politico-spatial injustice: ‘… in terms of infrastructure, …nothing has been added to… the water supply…[to] whatever the British had planned [then] for 3,000 people in Darjeeling town, [even though the population] is over 3 lakhs [300,000]’ (Wenner, 2013, p. 209). The under-investment in the region by the West Bengal administration is aggravated by the fact that, ‘although the Himalayan region is a source of countless perennial rivers, paradoxically the mountain people depend largely on [groundwater] springs for their sustenance’ (Tambe et al., 2012, 62). Access to groundwater is not easy in these hard rock mountain aquifers. Water supply governance here contradicts popular ‘“fixed-position, theoretically normative claims” of justice and solidarity as being synonymous with certain specific institutional models’ (Castree, 2011, p. 45). In the Darjeeling region, community, state and market-based approaches to manage water operate as hybrid systems. These hybrid arrangements of water delivery are nested in entrenched political, social, economic injustices and symptomatic of a democracy deficit evident in the wider political, social and economic setting. Not only is it impossible to identify “a certain, right institutional approach” to managing water, water supply injustices are also obscured by other competing political priorities.
But not all water injustices remain unnoticed. Since the early 2000s, the Teesta basin in the Eastern Himalaya has been the target of ambitious hydropower development plans. These developments are fuelled in part by the global re-positioning of large dams producing hydropower as climate mitigating green development; as well as by national interests relating to energy needs for economic growth (Ahlers et al., 2015). The hydropower projects have drawn attention of national and regional environmental activists, who question dam construction activities in the climate-vulnerable Eastern Himalaya waterscape; as well as skewed human-environment implications as a consequence of dam construction. Several reports highlight the procedural and distributional aspects of injustice: the institutional modalities through which environmental clearances and contracts have been awarded to private and public sector hydro-power entrepreneurs with scarce local community consultation; as well as the short- and long-term livelihood risks and challenges for marginal project-affected communities (Dubey et al., 2005, Bhattacharya et al., 2012, The Asia Foundation, 2013, Huber and Joshi, 2013).
What I discuss here is the fact that the contestations against dam building in the lower Teesta region of Darjeeling district are largely led by scientists, researchers and activists, who Holifield et al. (2009, p. 364) would describe as being ‘independent, “placeless”’ in the sense of not being from the area, and therefore likely lacking a certain intimate familiarity and [situated] attachment’ with the socio-political history of the region. Locally, there is an intriguing silence and inaction, both in relation to the enduring water supply crisis, as well as over recent contentious development of mega hydropower projects. The silence makes for an interesting contrast on the one hand with the articulate “outsider-led” contestations of hydropower projects as well with four decades of an intense internal political conflict for a separate state of Gorkhaland, a conflict essentially positioned as an “ethnoenvironmental injustice” (Anthias and Radcliffe, in press). What are the reasons for this silence? Why do recent contestations against dam building miss out on noticing the enduring old water supply injustices? In asking these questions it is interesting to reflect on Forsyth’s (2014, p. 230) analysis that, ‘So far, environmental politics does not consider deeply enough how or with whose concerns, justice is… [framed and] applied’.
In sum, water problems in the Darjeeling region appear embedded in ‘historically entrenched configurations of unequal spatial developments and legacies of socio-political contestations’ (McFarlane, 2011, p. 380). At a workshop organised locally in 2012, a participant expressed, ‘The problem is not water – water is only one manifest of everything else that is wrong here. Solutions need to emerge here locally and they need to go beyond water’. This makes for a valid point to review the tenacious links between justice, locational and environmental politics which are often overlooked in a narrow conceptualisation of water governance or injustice.
Section snippets
Methodology
Having spent my childhood and young adult life in the region, water as well as political problems here are not new to me. I recall how the toilets at school were flushed only once in a while, a few times in a week. At home, I remember bathing over a large water tub, reusing the water to wash clothes and then re-using that water to flush the toilets. The possibility to bathe only once a week posed serious practical and social handicaps to me as a young adult. However, I was sufficiently
Water justice essentialisms
Environmental justice (EJ) means different things to different people. There are differences in opinion on the origins of the concept of environmental justice, what constitutes EJ, and where and how it might be applied. The issues I note here are those that best relate to the context of this paper.
There are two main EJ perspectives – distributive and procedural, the former focusing on fair, rightful or equitable distribution and the latter, referring to rights of participation, of inclusion, of
The socio-political context of Darjeeling district
Darjeeling district is currently located in the State of West Bengal and consists of Kalimpong, Kurseong and Darjeeling sub-divisions in the hills and a plains sub-division of Siliguri. The political demand for a separate state of Gorkhaland corresponds only to the three hill sub-divisions, which are currently governed by the newly created [2011] Gorkha Territorial Administration (GTA) (see Map 2).
Darjeeling district was once part of the Kingdom of Sikkim, Bhutan and the Gorkha Kingdom (current
Wicked water problems in Kalimpong
Kalimpong town spreads geographically along a mountain ridge overlooking the river Teesta. The diverse ethnic make-up of the town reveals the region’s convoluted political history discussed above. This small, hitherto ‘water un-researched’ town with a population of 74,746 residents (2011 Census, Government of India) makes for an intriguing case to analyse the intersections of justice and water. Firstly, a silence and inaction around an enduring domestic water scarcity in the town contrast with
Water, the good and the bad ‘State’
The effectiveness and appropriateness of the state’s role in just water management is a topic of much dispute. On the one hand, neo-liberal prescriptions that call for a State withdrawal from public services have been identified as a dramatic loss of the welfare (Indian) state and its official intent to address the fundamental right to water (Cullet, 2009). And yet, the official intent to basic rights to water is often described as no more than a ‘mere declaration on paper’ (Iyer, 2007, p. 23).
The community, the collective, and public access to water
In Kalimpong whether one is connected or not to the official water supply system, one must pay to have access to water. This is the reality, unless one is a VIP (Very Important Person) living in or around the locations which house senior government officials, where the official infrastructure is best maintained; or endowed with water resources, i.e. natural springs located in one’s private lands. In the deeply feudal agrarian social structure of Kalimpong, such privileges are not available for
Neoliberalism and the commodification of water
As discussed above, an illegal water market functions within the dis-functional state and illegal payments are sourced to the official and political hierarchies. In addition, a formal water market, registered as the Kalimpong Water Supply Drivers’ Welfare Association is the lifeline of most residents and businesses in the town. Such a local market is obviously quite different to water markets described in the context of neo-liberalism (Bakker, 2007). However, the monopolistic ways in which it
Emerging new water injustices – the hydropower projects
In the introduction section, I discussed how the recent hydropower development in the Teesta basin as in the Eastern Himalayan region in general are fuelled by claims of renewable energy (hydropower) to mitigate climate change. ‘[B]ut, it is unclear how these projects will risk being skewed for marginal mountain communities in a region that is not only geologically and ecologically unique, but also politically fragile. Further, the seismic activity in the region makes it disproportionally
Conclusion
How anecdotal is this story of uneven, complex challenges around water in the Darjeeling district and, what relevance does the story hold for contemporary thinking around water and justice? I have tried to analyse these issues in the light of normative claims of justice identified as synonymous with certain institutional models of water governance (Castree, 2011) as well as in relation to the epistemic separation of justice as related only to ‘water’.
In the Darjeeling region, the silence
Acknowledgements
This study was facilitated initially by a co-funded grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) and the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), Project reference: W.07.04.030.225 and currently through a Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) CoCooN – Conflict and Cooperation in the Management of Climate Change – Integrated Project, Project reference: W.07.68.413. Special thanks are due to Roshan P Rai, Shikha Rai, Kavisha Dixit, Radha Mohini
References (59)
Climate justice is not just ice
Geoforum
(2014)A fair share? Perceptions of justice in South Africa’s water allocation reform policy
Geoforum
(2014)- et al.
Hybrid drinking water governance: community participation and ongoing neoliberal reforms in rural Rajasthan, India
Geoforum
(2012) - et al.
Globalizing Environmental Justice
Geoforum
(2014) - et al.
Postcolonial environmental justice: government and governance in India
Geoforum
(2006) Hydropower Development in India: A Sector Assessment
(2007)- et al.
Framing hydropower as green energy: assessing drivers, risks and tensions in the Eastern Himalayas
Earth Syst. Dyn. Discuss.
(2015) India’s socio-economic faultline – a review
- Anthias, P., Radcliffe, S.A., in press. The ethno-environmental fix and its limits: indigenous land titling and the...
The “Commons” versus the “Commodity”: alter-globalization, anti-privatization and the human right to water in the global south
Antipode
(2007)
Ethnicity, race and nationalism
Annu. Rev. Sociol.
Latin America’s left turn
Foreign Aff.
Neoliberalism and the biophysical environment 3: putting theory into practice
Geogr. Compass
The Politics of the Governed: Popular Politics in Most of the World
Lineages of Political Society: Studies in Postcolonial Democracy
Choosing the Gorkha: at the crossroads of class and ethnicity in the Darjeeling hills
Asian Ethnic.
Legality and legitimacy of public involvement in infrastructure planning: observations from hydropower projects in India
J. Environ. Plann. Manage.
New policy framework for rural drinking water supply: Swajaldhara guidelines
Econ. Polit. Weekly
A Concise History of the Darjeeling District Since 1835
For Whom the Teesta Flows? A Fact Finding Report on the Teesta Low Dam Project III
The politics of urban assemblages
City: Anal. Urban Trends Cult. Theory Policy Action
The Anti-Politics Machine: “Development”, Depoliticization and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho Minneapolis
Rethinking urban metabolism: water, space and the modern city
City
Landscapes of disaster: water, modernity, and urban fragmentation in Mumbai
Environ. Plann. A
Poverty, malgovernance and ethnopolitical mobilization: Gorkha nationalism and the Gorkhaland agitation in India
Natl. Ethnic Polit.
How to help, and how not to help, the poor in the megacities of the South
City: Anal. Urban Trends Culture Theory Policy Action
Cited by (0)
- ☆
I am interested in analysing the drivers and processes of policy reforms, understanding how policies evolve within different institutional cultures and the structures and power hierarchies which shape practice. I have researched the gendered impacts of development interventions and have conducted water-equity policy research. I am also involved in education and research capacity building initiatives in South and South East and Africa on the above issues. My current research looks at how climate change discourse reshapes environmental policy and interventions, and thereby justice. An ongoing research looks at the re-emergence of large dams as climate-mitigating “clean energy” hydropower projects in the climate-vulnerable Eastern Himalaya. The research focuses on how these developments overlay with complex, contextual dimensions of ethnicity, gender and democracy.