Environmental Studies Now

ABSTRACT

Environmental Studies – Now!

Amulya Ratna Tuladhar

Professor of Environmental Sciences

An academic program in environmental studies is long overdue in Nepal. This paper will briefly review some illustrative attempts to offer elements of environmental studies in current academic programs. Deficiencies of such programs will be pointed out.  An ideal structure of an academic program in environmental studies for the needs of environmental students in Nepal will be outlined for deliberation.

Paper presented at the One day workshop on, “Scopes, Issues and Challenges of Environmental Studies in Nepal” Tuesday, 13 December 2011, Seminar Hall, Science Block, Patan Multiple College.

Environmental Studies Program for Nepal: Need of the Hour

Amulya Ratna Tuladhar

Professor of Environmental Sciences

1. Introduction

An academic program in environmental studies in Nepal is long overdue.  Though we have a plethora of environmental programs, they are classifiable into: a) general environmental science programs; b) environmental technology programs; and c) interdisciplinary environmental programs.  What is solely lacking is a comprehensive environmental studies program that brings together in a coherent package all relevant disciplines for understanding and solving environmental problems in Nepal and in the world.  This paper will briefly review some illustrative examples of existing academic programs in environment to point out what is lacking.  An environmental studies program to rectify what is lacking in content will be proposed for deliberation.  In addition, some proposals for the delivery of such environmental studies program in terms of structure and institutional management will also be offered.

2. Current Environmental Programs and Their Deficiencies
1. Environmental Science Programs

Environmental science programs are general academic programs designed to prepare the students to the theory, tools and content of a broad range of environmental problems a student is likely to meet in Nepal or in an environmental career abroad. Examples of these are the Masters and Bachelors program in Environmental Science offered by Tribhuvan University and Kathmandu University. The focus is decidedly broad so depth is lacking.  The content and approach are science based so students do not have a grasp of social science tools like economic or ethnographic analysis.  In an attempt to cover the broad domain of environmental sciences from freshwater ecology to mountain ecology, from geology to climate change, the theoretical coverage is necessarily thin and superficial and just too broad to be useful for problem solving. A quick comparison of Grade IX to Grade XII S.L.C, CBSE, and “A” level environment related content with graduate level content at Masters level reveals that University environmental programs are rapidly falling behind in content and this is aggravated by the fast-paced, easy access to content in internet resources versus the slow-paced mechanisms of change and up gradation of graduate content in institutional decision-making.  In addition to the institutional lethargy and resource poverty, skill-oriented tools so necessary for immediate problem solving are dangerously behind market needs. Examples can be given of GIS, Statistical Research Techniques, Social Science Research Skills, EIA, Thesis/Report/Technical Writing, Team and Individual Presentation with PowerPoint, Policy Analysis Skills.  Hardly any of these skills and tools earns enough merit to be offered as full time, full subject course credit in official transcripts, often buried in 10-20 hour units in a 120 hour course.  Students who graduate often do not have immediate, usable, marketable skills so they learn these on_the_job when they get a job. Both KU and TU share the same philosophy in content design and delivery of environmental science academic programs, with KU being a little more agile in up gradation of course content. One of the burning problems of environmental science graduates of Nepal  is the lack of governmental career track to get into, like a Ministry of Environment environmental science cadre like forestry, agriculture and medical cadres.  Career opportunities are thus diffuse, mostly in NGO, INGOs  in non-environmental, entrepreunial sectors.  The field of environment is still so hot that most of the environmental science graduates do get some jobs despite their deficiencies but they often complain of not getting a secure career track or first choice entry level job often being outcompeted by candidates from specialized environmental technology with readily usable, market demand, environmental skills.

2. Environmental Technology Programs

By Environmental Technology Programs, I mean applied environmental science technology programs.  These are generally associated with sectoral ministries related to environment like forestry, agriculture, water resources etc.  My experience has been in forestry education so my review of environmental technology programs are drawn from this domain, which I gather, is representative of environmental technology programs in Nepal.  These programs are drawn to produce human resources to solve technical environmental problems important to the country.  For instance, foresters are expected conserve the productivity of forests and more recently, also the environmental services of forests, from carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation to livelihood enhancement through community forestry.  Similarly agriculturists are expected to boost food production to keep up with the increasing population and generate enough economic surpluses to transition the bulk of the population from an agricultural economy to an industrial, urban and service economy. Water resource engineers are expected to harness water for irrigation and power generation.  The commonality of all environmental technology programs is the skill-oriented, depth training of a limited slew of theoretical menu, so unlike general environmental science programs, these programs lack the theoretical breadth and depth, but are invested  in urgent applied skills – at least in intent.  These programs are high on national agenda so they have historically attracted donor support for infrastructure  and human resource capacity building with overseas higher education training, and even in the design of curricula.  For instance, several million dollars worth of grant and loans from World Bank to USAID were corralled to the Institute of Forestry, under Tribhuvan University (TU), beginning 1980s, to upgrade and expand the capacity of Nepal to produce community forestry oriented ‘officer’ and ‘ranger’ level manpower for the 20 year Forestry Sector Master Plan of 1989.  The current turnaround from deforestation to forest increase in the Midhills of Nepal due to community forestry may be partly attributed to this investment.  Despite the investment of so much resource, there are some systemic problems.  First, as pointed out earlier, the theoretical range of depth is limited to the protean and multifarious dimensions of one type of environmental problem solving, viz forestry.  For instance, if you ask any forester, be he a lowly forest guard or the Director General of Forest Department, he will candidly tell you that the actual job of forestry is 10% science and technology and 90% social, politics, law and administration.  While foresters are steeped  into the ecology of soil-plant relations, nursery and forest management, with even dashes of agroforestry and range management, his exposure to social science, economics, political science, development theory, policy and law or environmental ethics is either nil or token.  Although foresters are assured at least one government track, forestry cadre opening in Public Services Commission recognition, the number of forest graduates getting into a government forestry career has dwindled from 100% before the 1980s to less then 20% in 2011. A forestry degree is a key to get in and they learn all about forest policy, law, administration on the job - if they get a job - or from some higher studies abroad in forestry which are rarely usable in forestry jobs in Nepal.  So these foresters muddle along and if these foresters lose their jobs due to corruption or retirement or retrenchment, they survive a few years based on payback from their network and patron-client investments but they are rarely capable of holding on their own professionally where new interdisciplinary thinking  relating to the analysis and synthesis of social science, humanities, policy are needed to design new solutions and understanding of complex environmental problems such as sustainable development, green economy, climate change, gender mainstreaming, or even higher order ecological and environmental modeling increasing on demand in Nepal and abroad.   And here comes the interdisciplinary environmental programs to fill in this gap.

3. Interdisciplinary Environmental Programs

Interdisciplinary environmental programs have generally sprung up in academic homes different from the sciences because the market demands for such programs have not been fulfilled by the feeble attempts to broaden existing environmental science and technology programs from their hearths in the sciences.  We might cite examples of forestry and agriculture programs offering agroforestry and engineering schools offering interdisciplinary water resources programs or natural resources management but these so-called  interdisciplinary broadening are firmly rooted in the theoretical and professional homes of their mother disciplines and the amount of exposure across disciplines demanded by the market place is superficial at best.  They are overwhelmingly rooted in science and there is almost a dumbfounded antagonism to accept social sciences or humanities as co-equals in solving current environmental problems.  So products of these feeble attempts find themselves unable to grapple with theoretical underpinnings of sustainable development, gender and marginal group inclusion, discourse analysis or conflict and policy analysis needed in environmental problem-solving.

To address these needs, some of the non-science based academic programs have attempted to fill these holes.  Examples are Malpi International College dual university program in Bachelor of Liberal Arts and Sciences with Purvanchal and Mississippi University that offered Environmental Ethics. The School of Environmental Management and Sustainable Development (SchEMS) under Pokhara University offered a Masters in Environmental Management while the School of Education and School of Arts of Kathmandu University offered Masters programs in Environmental Education and Sustainable Development, Development Studies and Human and Natural Resources Studies offered subjects such as Global Climate Change and Sustainable Development, Population and Development, Forestry and Wildlife Management with Conservation of Protected Areas, Conflict and Gender Studies, etc.  These programs are only about a decade old, have donor support and are agile enough to introduce new subjects quickly as market demands.  However, these programs do not have coherent vision or cadre of teachers and are often dependent on the efficiency of the leader (Dean or Program Coordinator) who can tap external donors, potential NGO/INGOs for internship/research/job opportunities for their graduates, and thus increase their brand value and attractiveness to potential students. The programs are volatile and fragile; apt to break down with change of leadership, funding support or partnership with potential employers since the programs are not recognized as minimum professional degrees for government sectoral ministries such as forestry or medicine. Therefore, all of the graduates are destined for nongovernmental environmental job market where they face stiff competition from excess environmental science and technology graduates as well more highly trained manpower with training from abroad or from more experienced human resources. Nonetheless, most graduate do find some jobs since the environmental market is still booming and can tolerate weak candidates as demand exceeds supply. These interdisciplinary programs still do not equip the students for the whole range of concepts and skills necessary for the market. Examples include training in political ecology, discourse analysis, climate change vulnerability and environmental modeling. That is why there is a need for a coherent Environmental Studies program that adequately prepares students for the whole range of concepts and skills needed in today’s job market.

3. An “Ideal” Environmental Studies Program for Nepal

An ideal environmental studies program for Nepal should be able to offer access to all the necessary disciplines relevant to solving the environmental problems in Nepal now and in the foreseeable future. To discuss what this ought to be, let us reiterate what this should not be.  It should not be a science only or technology only or social science only program that has been tried out in various institutions in Nepal.  Since this environmental studies program should be able to access all the necessary disciplines, such a program can be housed only in a central campus with access to faculty in at least three major categories: the sciences, the technologies, and the social sciences and humanities. So we can rule out smaller specialized science, technology, or social science campuses like Amrit Science, IOF, or Rara. However, some of the bigger established mega campuses such Trichandra, Patan, Prithvi Narayan, Ramsworup Ramsagar as well as newer private colleges trying to be universities such Goldengate and Khwopa College can qualify based on infrastructure and human resources access across these disciplines, with the caveat that the institutions can access more expensive and qualified senior faculty rather than only cheaper and more malleable younger faculty only to sustain graduate program and confer credibility to the program.

An ideal environmental studies program should have a general exposure Bachelor program of 4 years and specialist graduate program of 2 years for Masters and a 3 year for Ph.D.  The Bachelor Program should offer compulsory courses with 1/3 weightage in sciences, technology and humanities with the option to major in particular stream in the 4^th year. The Bachelor program should introduce students to all concepts, terms, tools, issues necessary for understanding and solving environmental problems and much of this is downloadable from internet and standard textbooks.  The aim is to offer the broad domain of choices in environmental career not to train specialist. Currently, nearly all the graduate (Masters) programs in Nepal are at this level: internet downloadable concepts, tools, and definitions without any preparations for analysis/synthesis, critical thinking, and presentation to solve real world environmental problems that are NOT downloadable or memorisable from standard textbooks.

The Master’s program should be designed to produce specialist (Master) who can solve complex environmental problems that require critical analysis and synthesis of theories, concepts, tools and methodologies across sciences, technologies and social sciences and humanities. This maybe divided into a first year of synthetic courses such as Gender Issues in Environment, Environmental History of Landuse Landcover Changes, Sustainable Development and Vulnerability Analysis, Carbon Sequestration Modeling, GIS and Remote Sensing in Environment etc which do not have standard textbook answers or copy and paste internet resources or model answers to model questions but require seminar mode of teaching in which students do their own research in libraries, field, internet, discuss and participate in both vertical and lateral learning, make presentations, prepare proposals, conduct research and formulate conclusions that can be disseminated in international refereed journals.  The second year should have at least one semester of internship and one semester of thesis study with the option for delving into depth with selected directed readings on specific topics with the faculty.

4. Delivery of Environmental Studies Program

To deliver such an ideal environmental studies program, one needs not only a range of human resources/teachers in a full-fledged mega campus or central university campus but also other institutional delivery vehicles. We begin with what is NOT workable. TU administration is too big and unwieldy to deliver fast changing, quality programs needed for environmental studies program as the decision making system is too slow.  When I was the Coordinator for the Community Forestry Bachelor in Forestry program under the aid and support of donors and forest ministry, TU took over 3 years to approve a brand new Bachelor program. The Environmental Science of TU is undergoing syllabus review after 10 years now and till then, both students and teachers are stuck to model answers for model questions or concepts and references 20 years old in subjects taught, with the institutional disincentive to introduce new concepts or data.  Contrast this with KU management where professors are given the trust and liberty to upgrade the course each semester and have total control over grading. Even the program course structure is open to modification every 2-3 years. Other academic institutions are midway.

Second, the environmental studies needs access to quality teachers and students and this is self-feeding. If quality teachers, mostly from professional field with recent experience and more relevant trainings are to be hired with attractive pay package and benefits as well as creative freedom, this will lead to recruiting top quality students who are willing to pay high fees, face stiff selections, for the promise of great training and great job prospects. It works other way round too; many TU programs are struggling to fill in seats because they accept whoever applies and have poor quality teachers because they cannot offer good pay nor academic freedom.

ANNEXES of Internet Links to Information on:

1.      A sample of Environmental Studies program from Kentucky University

2.      IOF Master’s program in NRM & Rural Development & Watershed Mgt

3.      NEC Master’s program in NRM and IWRM, Pokhara University

4.      Schemes Masters in Environmental Management, Pokhara U

5.      School of Arts, KU, Masters Program in HNRS & Dev Studies

6.      School of Education, KU, Masters Program  in EESD.

7.      School of Science, KU, Masters Program in Env Science

8.      Institute of Science, TU, Masters Program in Env Science

Pw:atuladhar

POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE THE BOX

POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE THE BOX

 by

AMULYA RATNA TULADHAR, JULY 2011

(Article for publication)

=================================

Population and Development Outside the Box

Amulya Ratna Tuladhar, 2011

One hundred years of counting Nepalese, this year 2011, is a good time to do some outside the box thinking on population and development. What are ways of broadening the discourse of business as usual categories that keep yielding the same old, same old understanding and solutions that most of us are exasperated about? What follows is a sample of such an effort in graduate course of population and development; for details readers are invited to visit the blogsite http://amulyaratna.blogspot.com/ for DEVS 504.

Nepal’s population increased nearly 4 times in 90 years since the first census in 1911 to the last census in 2011. Before this census, indirect reconstructions had our country’s population around 3 million around Prithvi Narayan’s time in 1768.

What will be our country’s population in the future, the next 100 years? 100 million? 60 million? Or 40 million? Depending on how we handle the rate of our fertility decline, says demographers Shyam Thapa and his colleagues in 2001.

The demographic transition from high birth and high death rates to low birth and death rates, observed in Europe over the last 200 years seems to be happening at a much faster rate in Nepal. A stabilizing population seems to be in sight contrary to the Malthusian doom we are currently facing with population rates exceeding our food production rate.

Will the population numbers and rate outpace our development and national aspirations to have a better life? Contrary to our frustrations that India and China who were as destitute Third World nations like Nepal 60 years are now chugging ahead while we seem to be stuck behind? Right?

Wrong! The Human Development Index, a composite of Wealth, Health and Literacy shows that we have made almost 100% progress over the last 30 years from 0.210 to 0.428; agreed there is a lot disparity over space, time, class, gender, castes etc and some even have reservations over the methodology and assumptions of such a measure.

One such glaring inadequacy is the non inclusion of Environment in this index. “Are we better off now than we were 30 years ago, in terms of environment?” we can ask the  Reaganesque question.

The World Bank in 2007 asked this same question in their Country Environmental Analysis of Nepal. And,… the Bank conceded that environmental costs of getting rich has been high, up to 3.5% of GDP in higher health costs alone and this is likely to be higher since up to 50% of the national economy is directly or indirectly linked to natural resources of the environment.

How do we protect the environment and reduce poverty is the central policy question of the Poverty-Environment Initiative (PEI) Nepal framework for 2010, developed by the National Planning Commission, the Ministry of Local Development and the UNDP Nepal and UNEP. This Initiative has tried to integrate pro-poor climate and environmental concerns for sustainable development. Have we not heard that before?

Conflict with environment is an emerging issue discussed in a paper by Asian Development Bank and ICIMOD in 2006. Widespread conflicts over a range of natural resources such as forests, land and water have been noted and these have spread to urban environment too. A well developed means of environmental conflict resolution does not seem to exist.

Environmental conflict is thought to be driven by increased scarcity of environmental resources. Some relatively successful examples of environmental conflict management include Nepal’s community forestry but there are many unsuccessful examples as in urban environmental issues where even the Supreme Court decisions on the Government bodies to adhere to environmental laws of the land are routinely ignored.

Theoretical reasons for such conflict may be rooted in the oxymoron juxtaposition of sustainable development as two antagonistic ideologies: ‘sustainability’ originally coming from World Conservation Strategy, 1980, developed by global ecology bodies such as IUCN, WWF and UNEP to mean limits due to ecology while the ‘sustainability” from Brundlandt Report 1987 mean limitless economic growth to meet the needs of human generations ad infinitum. Conflict is therefore the necessary essence of sustainable development maintains Redclift in his 2005 paper.

Environmental degradation is even alleged to be a hitherto unacknowledged “ultimate cause of Maoist rebellion” in Nepal, asserts Bhurtel and Ali in their 2003 research paper. This is in stark contrast to a plethora of social, political and economic explanation we have heard so far.

The role of State as part of the problem in the population and development issues of Nepal is an outside the box thinking. No longer is it accepted that the State is a secular conduit of development or even an agent of positive change. This discourse deserves our serious attention.

 A theoretical paper on the transformation of the Nepalese State by David Gellner in 2002 takes us from pre-State Nepal through the centralized monolithic State to the contested idea of State. Instances of the variegated shape, reach and power of the Nepalese State with respect to environmental programs is documented by Ben Campbell.

In 1989 when I visited Kandebas ridgeline boundary between Gulmi and Baglung as a part of Lokta stock assessment for UNESCO, villagers there were still practicing the traditional Mana-Pathi community management of forests although Nepal was theoretically under the uniform management of the Private Forest Nationalization Act 1957.

It is clear the State is NOT the exclusive player in population and development in Nepal. This is a theme that has been intellectually explored by political ecologists such as Piers Blaikie and Harold Brookfield, 1987, in their landmark Land Degradation and Society. Here, the Himalayan land degradation is presented as a crisis of explanation rather than a crisis of ecology; an effect cascading from international political economy all the way to the land manager farmer in their interaction with the local environment.

The intellectual and theoretical boundaries of political ecology have been pushed to Liberation Ecology by Michael Watts and Richard Peet, 2004. Here the State has been de_essentialized as a contested agency of social and political movements dealing with social equity and environmental livelihoods such as Chipko Andolan.  The contestation has broadened from material means of production such as land, labor to non-material knowledge and discourse on how power is created, negotiated, and transformed into material change in population and development.

An example of how discourse, like the tale of Emperor’s New Clothes, can prohibit certain powers (Only the wise can see the Emperor’s fantastic naked costume) is illustrated in contrasting development discourses on male migration in Nepal by Jeevan Sharma in 2008. Here, he demonstrates how the dominant development discourse paints migration as an activity to be ashamed of, while an alternative discourse paints migration as a romantic, adventurous activity to be proud of.

One of the dominant discourses relevant to Nepal is The Himalayan Environmental Degradation proposed by Erick Eckholm in the 1970s where overpopulation in Nepal hills was considered to be prime cause of Bangladesh effects through deforestation, denudation and soil erosion.

This was the dominant, neo-Malthusians discourse during the time of The Club of Rome, 1972, which projected overpopulation as the number one villain for all problems from environmental degradation to poverty, just as we have global warming and climate change as number one driver of global change in the popular imagination nowadays.

But even a neo-Malthusian such as Paul Ehrlich conceded that global environmental change was due to a number of factors in addition to population in his conceptual formula, IPAT, or environmental impact, I, as multiplicative product of population, P, affluence, A, and technology, T. Working on global land use and land cover change, Billie L Turner II and William B Meyer in 1995 proposed IPATIC, or the inclusion of institutions, I, and culture, C.

Different forms of institutions, defined as socially embedded system of rules such as law and marriage and organizations. For instance, Sanderson points out those institutional mechanisms of property rights and land reform are important to explain global land use change.

Culture deals with attitude and beliefs and a lot of land use decisions are based on such cultural norms and values according to Rockwell so they ought to be studied together with population and other explanatory variables of environmental change.

Although population has been considered an independent variable, authors such as Colin Sage advocate studying population and income together because they interact in complex and inseparable ways to affect land use.

The discourse on population and development is often alarmist and pessimist but the hazards school concentrating on why and how people adapt to risky situations offers hope. Of these,  Regions at Risk, based on a global study of critical regions of the world by Kasperson et al of Clark University and published by the United Nations University Press, 1995, have looked into Nepal along with Amazon basin, the Ordos Plateau and Mexico City as a critical region.

They used common concepts and methods such as  the trajectory of environmental change, well being, wealth along with concepts of environmental sensitivity and resilience. The authors classified risk into three categories: impoverished, endangered and critical.

“Critical” means that regional environmental change might continue through a trajectory of irreversible deterioration in this generation even when wealth and human well being were considered: such was the case for the Aral Sea.

Nepal was considered “Impoverished to Endangered” with some degree of certainty; in other words, there was some danger of irreversible environmental degradation in next two generations but there are also hopes of wealth generating human well being and resources for environmental stewardship. This was in 1995.

Today, 15 years later, we have some reasons for hope in the form of community forestry successfully greening the Nepal hills with the participation of nearly a third of the country’s population despite all the problems we have.

Nepal is progressing into the third stage of demographic transition from high birth and death rate to low death and birth rate and slowing population growth rate; the 2011 census is expected to confirm a declining population growth rate from 2.25 % a year to 2.17% or thereabouts.

Even development stands to take-off after real progress in the human development index and some lag time in the payoff in the investment in education and social transformation to a more equitable society where all the energies of the Nation will be released.

We are doing something right. The goal of this essay was to critically examine these outside the box discourses in population and development and consolidate such processes and forces for more efficient management of population and development.

Tuesday, July 05, 2011