Interview: Economist and Author Kaveri Gill

On Tuesday, we reviewed Kaveri Gill's book, Of Poverty and Plastic. Gill uses an interdisciplinary approach to poverty analysis in the Indian plastic recycling industry.  In the process, she gives us important insights into the ways in which poverty, development and the environment interact in urban India. You can read our review here; we think that Of Poverty and Plastic is a rigorous, ambitious book that will be appreciated by both activists and academics alike.  Today, we are pleased to follow up our review with an interview with the author.

Tell us how you became interested in plastic recycling in the first place. 

Well, more than plastic recycling, as an economist I have always been interested in poverty and employment / labour markets. And in fact, that remains the key focus of the book, as suggested by the title, which alludes to Steinbeck's 'Of Mice and Men' and its themes of poverty during the Depression, migrant workers, and their dreams of a better life. Informal plastic recycling, as one of many informal sectors, provides a 'free' livelihood to lots of migrants to the city in the context of liberalisation , and I was struck by the great irony of these people - especially those at the lowest levels of the chain - not passively accepting of their poverty and expecting handouts, but instead exerting great agency through a market to better their lot in life, even as they contribute to the greening of the city. And yet they come up against an unhelpful state, and prejudiced judiciary and civil society.  

Your book is based on interviews, surveys and focus groups conducted in slums and markets where many of Delhi's plastic workers live and work . Can you tell us a little about that experience? Any moments or lessons that stand out for you in particular?

Well, I spent more than fifteen months at a stretch in the slums of Jwalapuri and the Mundka recycling market, a decade ago now.....and have returned regularly since. During this time, I have made good friends, and really seen the view from the other side. The thing that struck me most, and remains with me, is how the opposite of powerless and passive these people are in accepting the deal handed out to them by life. As development economists and specialists, we spend our lives hearing about the importance of the poor 'exerting agency and voice'. And that is exactly what these people have painfully wrested for themselves. In a context where they are given no security and certainty about the legality of their slum plots, are rarely the recipients of regular service delivery of water or electricity -- ironically, they are underserved by the municipality as regards solid waste management and are instead themselves the free providers of the same! -- have no access to the formal labour market or any social security from the state, they have managed to painfully negotiate all of the above through creating this informal sector work, and establishing hegemony over it, thus gaining some measure of economic and political power. This they use to overcome the social stigma they face on the ground of their doing 'polluting' work, in a ritual as opposed to environmental, sense!  

You argue that middle class urban environmentalists tend to privilege “green agenda” issues like climate change and biodiversity over what what you call “brown agenda” issues like safe water, sanitation and housing. Do you see these agendas as exclusive, or is their room for common ground?  

Well, I don't see the 'green' and 'brown' agenda as mutually exclusive. By all means, let the middle classes be concerned with both! But in privileging the former over the latter, we are in danger of internally reflecting the developed country / developing country hierarchy and divide so clearly in evidence at Copenhagen. Our elites and expanding middle classes cannot wish away the 50% of the other half forming our largest metropolitan cities, like Mumbai and Delhi. And unless we take their basic needs -- housing, safe water, sanitation -- into account as a matter of priority, even as we increase our own conspicuous consumption, we are setting ourselves up for great inequality and trouble.  

Your portrayal of waste pickers and the small godown owners for whom they work is complex, but you seem to agree that society could do better by them. Given extremely low margins of profit in this commodity chain, is it possible to imagine an effective system of plastic recycling that provided these workers with a better standard of living?

Yes, first, the state and judiciary and civil society shouldn't hinder the work they are doing. If we can't help them, leave them alone - but don't create unnecessary obstacles and hurdles by banning the recycling (again, great irony but no surprises there, we have never considered banning the primary production and consumption, which would solve the environmental problem far more effectively!), by requiring they fulfill expensive regulatory requirements which would render this low value added industry economically unviable (like printing recycled content and polymer type on each product, which even the primary industry is not yet enforced to do, as it is in industrialised countries!)

If we want to help them improve their standard of living, then there are means -- give them technological aid; make banking and microfinance loans available to them etc.

You point out that lion's share of the job growth that has occurred in the past 20 years has occurred in the informal sector. You seem ambivalent about this. On the one hand, the informal sector has been the source of a lot of innovation in areas like plastic recycling; and in many cases it does the work the state seem incapable of doing. On the other hand, informal sector work offers little security, and often reinforces the "hard bar" of caste. Do you see a way out of this? 

Let me be clear about my position on the informal sector. The reality is, it accounts for 93% of the labour force in our country at present. In an ideal world, it would be far less and many more would have formal sector employment, with social security and other benefits. But we are far from that point. In the meantime, none of my informal waste worker groups fall below the official state poverty line for Delhi, not even the waste pickers working on dumps. This is perhaps the most key finding of my book, yet it has been overlooked by many. This means they are not eligible for any handouts from the state. It is against this backdrop, and in this context, that they are delivered to the doors of the informal plastic recycling 'market' to survive and make a living for themselves. To take that away from them without offering a viable alternative is to consign them to the life of even greater destitution. Of course, one hopes in the long run, as the economy grows and develops, and more numbers are able to participate and benefit from an inclusive economy, this kind of work dies a natural death, as it did in post-industrial societies of the west. In the meantime, let them survive through an independent, and in it's own way, dignified employment and market opportunity. 

To find find out more about Of Poverty and Plastic see  review from Tuesday.  There you will also find out how you can enter our contest to win a free (and well-used) copy of the book--but hurry, you've got less than two weeks!  Want a brand new copy?  Here are the links you need:

Buy Of Poverty and Plastic in India from Flipkart

Buy Of Poverty and Plastic in the USA from Oxford University Press

Buy Of Poverty and Plastic in the UK from Amazon

 ****

Don't forget to celebrate to India's refusal to allow Bt Brinjal into the country!  If it hadn't been for the thousands and thousands of people who marched, testified, fasted and petitioned, the outcome would have almost certainly been different.  Hats off to the people who worked so hard to make this victory possible.

Interview: Environmentalist Photographer Ravi Agarwal

Ravi Agarwal  is an environmentalist, photographer, and writer who lives and works in New Delhi.  Agarwal's photos and writing have appeared widely, both here and abroad, but like many in Delhi, I first saw his work in First City, where his  photo column is a regular feature. That column, "< ALT > View",   typically consists of one photo and minimal  text;  more like a photo-poem than photo-essay.  Agarwal raises all kinds of interesting questions about the city we live in.  Today, we are lucky enough to get his perspective on some of those questions.

Before you became a photographer, you were an engineer.  How were those kinds of work alike?  How were they different?
Actually I was a photographer before everything, since I was 13 years old. Engineering was analysis, fourier transforms, physics, mathematics - all about understanding and designing to make things work and happen. Photography was walking on the streets, smelling the monsoon, talking to rickhshawallas, exploring bylanes and being free. They were both different. One I had to work hard for, the other came naturally!
 

You describe yourself as an environmentalist photographer.  What does that term mean to you?
This is just a description of my two current engagements in life. At another level, I define my relationship with the world as a 'personal ecology' and my photographic work as well as now video and installation work resonates with that idea - so in a sense they come together as well.

Why photography? What subjects, what ideas, interest you most in your work?
Photography follows my life and engagements. My subjects have ranged from the street, to labor, 'work,' river, urban scapes and also self performance. It is a companion to me.

Talk about the tension you see in Delhi between nature and what is usually called development or growth.
Delhi has been losing its relationship with the natural world for over a 100 years. This is most accelerated now. The idea of a city itself is a industrial age idea, where water is transported in, waste is transported out, energy is streamed in and land is divided for habitation. It is itself an idea which confronts technology and nature as a separation. In cities as well as in Delhi,nature becomes a 'necessity' an 'aesthetic,' a place of leisure and recreation. Hence nature is only defined in relationship to the city. This is very much our own existence as well.

Physically, we have lost over 150,000 trees for the new Commonwealth Games, a 10 day phenomenon. We have sacrificed the river flood plain to temples and housing. We have built metros and roads and malls on the Ridge. Most of all we have isolated nature, since Delhi is now surrounded by urbanisation all around. So nature is something we have to fight to keep, on its own it is shrinking and will disappear one day. If this is development, then we need to question it in a basic way. Does 'development' take us away from our 'roots?'

We've been hearing about the Commonwealth Games for years now.  They have been used to justify all kinds of things--from the metro to new flyovers and sports venues.  What is your sense of this? Has it all been worth it?
If we have the Commonwealth Games at all! We will have something, held in patched up stadiums and with the poor people 'hidden' from view. It is all bizzare, all this frenzy in the name of the games, while actually it is about ambition, money and false pride. We treat our sports people so badly, so how can we talk of the Games as a sport? It is everything else couched as 'sport.'

What holds Delhi back its quest to become "World Class?"
A world class city can only be built through a society which is just, fair and respectful to each other. The city is not an architectural project, it is a human one. Architecture has to suit that. We have placed the idea of spectacular and scale before the human. Else why would we destroy trees, displace people, throw out beggars, take away parks etc.? Any world class city is a very livable city, where people can work, create, interract ect. Can we say that about Delhi? I do not think so. We could earlier, now we can less and less.

Can you tell us something that is working well in Delhi?  Something environmentalists (and photographers) from other cities and countries can learn from this city?
I think the city has great human potential. it has great energy on its street, and great entrepreneurship. It has thinkers, writers, artists, politicians, activists... all. This is the new capacity in the city. It has intensity.  We can learn that any place needs 'engagement' for it to grow. A city cannot become anything without such involvement. At another level, the metro is a great success, even though it cannot address the needs of all people. The metro stands out, overall.  

Anything else you'd like to add?
Only something  I feel....
Life is short, and uncertain. we should try to live it with that sense of urgency and engagement. No matter what we do, we should do it, and do it well.

To find out more about Ravi Agarwal and his work, check out his website here.

Interview: Environmental Activist and Student Kabir Arora

Most people who have closely followed environmental politics in Delhi recently have heard of Kabir Arora.  Kabir is a student leader and an active member of several groups, including the Indian Youth Climate Network (IYCN) and the National Alliance of Anti-Nuclear Movement (NAAM).  Today he gives his opinion of Copenhagen ("The most expensive and highly polluting tea party in the earth's history"), and explains why environmentalism "isn't just about plants and animals." He's also got a few words for the PM.

Tell us a little about yourself--the kind of work you do and what brought you to the movement. 

I'm doing my Graduation in Geography from Jamia Millia Islamia.  I'm in my final year now. I was associated with Pahal (for past five years); the search took me to Rural Litigation Entitlement Kendra (in Dehradoon-for a month) and Sadhana Forest (Auroville, Tamil Nadu-for a month). 

The Center for Science and Environment is a milestone in my life.  I have done two months summer certificate course (Agenda for Survival-08) from there. The course actually opened my eyes. The literature penned down by Late Mr. Anil Aggarwal mentored me and prepared my ideology for the way forward. At present, I'm volunteering with Indian Youth Climate Network (IYCN). I recently got a Gandhi Fellowship-which is about working in the field of education, understanding the system by becoming a part of it. It is even more about transforming oneself to be a part of Indian tradition of humility.


It's clear from your activism and writing that you aren't a single-issue environmentalist. Can you say a little about the connections you see between the work you do as an environmentalist and your pro- justice, anti-nuclear stands?
I'm not sure whether I'm working as environmentalist/activist or not. But yes I'm a student and will try to answer it with the same spirit. Environmentalism especially in India doesn't mean to limit oneself to just conserving plants and animals. It is about understanding the relationship of man with nature, man with the society and a new addition--technology. So human rights which also includes gender issues, caste-class-communal violence, wars etc. opposition to them and justifiable use of technology becomes an essential part of environmentally sound society. That's where the pro-justice and anti-nuclear stands come from (even I'm a part of group of people who are opposing Genetically Modified Crops, doing whatever I can do on my part to oppose it).  We need a peaceful, environmentally sound, sustainable nation and world. For that, in the words of Arundhati Roy, "A sex workers and Anti Nuclear Activists have to walk together". The need of the hour is to fight with the consumerist model of development which is behind all the blunders in the present day world.

IYCN and other environmentalists put a lot of energy into the lead up to Copenhagen. How did you feel about the outcome of those negotiations? Anything you found particularly disappointing? Any surprising bright spots?
Civil Society organizations across the globe came together for a fair deal in Copenhagen (whether many of them have their own vested interest) which is a big thing, a surprising bright spot. This momentum built at that time can take us forward to a participatory and decentralized model of democracy which is missing in the present undemocratic western notion of democracy--a ray of hope! Many of the prominent environmentalists already had made it clear (Before COP 15) that nothing will happen in Copenhagen, so I didn't have any expectations from it on my part. (In IYCN we still awaited for a miracle to happen in COP which didn't). About the outcome of negotiations, we all are unhappy in the network. We haven't worked out our official stand on it, but my personal opinion about it will be that it was the most expensive and highly polluting tea party in the earth's history in the name of saving Climate.
 

The debate is not about saving earth or climate, it is for saving human species which we need to consider. It is an emergency like situation where all of us need to work out for structural change instead of doing publicity oriented campaigns (it is also a lesson for us in IYCN too). Most importantly this change will not come from Copenhagen, Kyoto or Mexico further. The citizens of the world have to work out something to get it done.

What issues do you see as the priorities for environmentalists in India in the coming year?
We need to make our hands strong to fight the consumerist (capitalist/imperialist whatever you name it) model of development. The lesson which both Mahatama Gandhi and Bhagat Singh taught us need to be brought in action. It is a high time for us to listen to the founders of the spirit of India. Environmentalists have to mingle in the masses. Right time to come out of Air Conditioned offices and smell the soil of the country.

Climate Emergency which is an umbrella issue can be an opportunity for us to get the change and get out of this design crisis. To mitigate and adapt the climate change we need to have participation of common people. This our leaders and corporations have to understand. For that more Satyagrahas are waiting ahead. (If we have to do Satyagraha in free India that means it is not at all free).

If you had a private meeting with Manmohan Singh and Jairam Ramesh, what would you say to them?
Dr. Manmohan Singh Ji and company (including other political personalities) you have done enough service of nation. It will be good if you get some rest and do the devolution of power, open the way for bottom to top approach. Otherwise... 

"Kikra Ve Kandiyalia Ve Hun ei Chadeya Pooh
Haqq Jinna de Aapne Oh Aape Lenge Khoh"--Amrita Pritam. 

(Whatever common masses deserve they will snatch it).

What is one thing environmentalists in the rest of the world can learn from India? 

In the beginning I've mentioned that environmentalism for us is more than conserving species. For us it is a livelihood issue to secure our present. In order to get it, different societies in this country adopted different measures. From saving water in Rajasthan to Chipko in Uttarakhand. In plains, people practiced sustainable agriculture which in my home state is named as Nanak Kheti (Baba Nanak was a farmer) by Kheti Virassat Mission, even hunting or fishing never exceeded a limit in the tribal areas. They have their own norms to maintain the balance. All of us even in India (especially for the people like me who just talk :P) need to learn-- rest of the world will follow us if we start acknowledging, appreciating and practicing the wisdom we have around us.