CONFESSIONS OF A PARTICIPATORY NONEQUILIBRIUM HUMAN ECOLOGIST ‘A NEW SYNTHESIS’ – AN INDIAN EXPERIENCE.

S.K BALACHANDER,

READER IN BOTANY,LOYOLA ACADEMY,SECUNDERABAD 500010,AP,INDIA.

Introduction

The Deccan Plateau, of the Northern semi-arids, in the Indian subcontinent, historically, captures,a canvassi of livelihoods, with vivid entitlement exchanges, admist prudence and profligacy, of the Human ecology of communities. The rural-urban trasitional continuum, portrays a ‘dynamic reality’ in the contemporary scenario, of an emergent city. The Hyderabad metropolitan, my ‘sense of place and belonging’ , is poised towards government populalist policies of e-governance , ecotourism and widely trumpeted people’s participation, with World Bank aid and NGOs in the bandwagon.

The landscape is dynamic and specially and temporally disaggregated, in the microniche, with communites, experiencing , diverse, dfferentiated urban and rural elements, in the households, under transience.. Parallel to this is the unseen ‘shadow economy of survival’, on an everyday crisis, with fuzzy entitlement exchange and rural-urban straddlers.

The ‘local, complex, diverse,differenciated, unpredictable, (lcddu)’ communities and livelihoods on the continuum experience, turbulence and embark on multiple voices and realities, far from neat synergism and consensus-based blue print approaches, as well as external bureaucratic fantasies, in urban agriculture and community forestry.

THE PREAMBLE

The present study, conducted in ‘1995-2000’ on a continuum, had conventionally started with a blue print approach, the study of Food-Energy nexus and agroecosystems,Farming systems,with RRA/PRA methodological galore, an NGO led coalition,and a questionnaire survey method.

Paradoxically,the researcher encountered a developmental wary audience,half-filled sheets and the participatory fetish of the NGOs and the government programmes.The sustainability elements,conceptualised,were in contradiction to the ground realities,captured on a messy matrix of transience,in multiple voices,under pluralistic perspective.

THE GROUND REALITIES

Unknowingly,on apriori terms,by experiential participatory processes,sequestered in bits and pieces,with opposites as well,the evidences,were deduced,while straddling the shifting middle ground of blue vs process approaches,pitfalls of quantitayive research,limits of energy analysis,agroecosystem analysis,projection modelling,hurried comparison with success stories,.Strategic rationalities,are no doubt,to be acknowledged, from other studies! The unknown, yet emergent complex human ecology of patterns, processes, flows,l inkages and decision-making, in changing contexts and phenomenology,were in oral testimony,visual mapping and sharing sessions,in sharp contrast to issues envisaged!

On introspection,the researcher,was able to weave the patterns (fortunately,in contrast to the peer reviewers,who found it as an abberent,to conventional studies!),from Food-Energy Nexus-the central dogma of Human Ecology,enroute entitlement mapping,disaggregated analysis and mapping,fuzzy entitlement exchanges,trans-pastoralism,herder’s mobility, and an array of (un)sustainability indicators.

The discovery of the methodolical processes was by backcasting,when the stumbling was into the vortex of nonequilibrium ecology,participatory action research processes,facilitation, and experiential,surrogative,as well as grassroot indicators and no indicators too!

The multiple voices,eclectic methods,is now put back into realities,by seperating the methodologies from the conceptul frames,an issue to reckon,where those creative spaces and moments of inspired thinking ,were at work,to address to the lost roads and newer paradigms,are to be realised!

THE METHODOLOGICAL PROCESSES-‘APRIORI’MODE,-A NEW SYNTHESIS.

Investigation in semi-arid, fragile livelihoods and environmental change, included-PRA,RRA, environmental entitlement analysis, community forestry tool box, Naturalistic inquiry, Focus groups, Participatory observation, case study, units of analysis, breaking the ice experiences, tree inventory and LKMS, stress and shocks, stakeholder analysis, historical ecology, ecoregional constructs, GIS mapping, livelihood analysis, historical ecology, ecoregional constructs, GIS mapping, livelihood analysis, pariticipatory indices of household vulnerability, fuzzy entitlement mapping, changes in land use,…

The research while seeking indicators, as envisaged by backcasting, affirms, the belief, that the magic toolbox can disappear, as contexts change, pitfalls can occur and fitness of function is a guiding tool, in apriori terms, participatory experiential learnings and evaluation, in microcontexts. The methodologies remain open, ephemeral, context specific, addressing to the creative space in policy implications and can cotribute as a convenient yardstick to monitor, evaluate, our own experiences, the NGOs, funding agencies, participatory researchers alike, while on limits to the transitions, beyond the participatory carnival!

‘Eclectic’ participatory methodological and conceptual frameworks, are apparently, the realities, to be explored, experienced, in the current ‘search niche’, towards eco-sustainable initiatives on the peri-urban/urban edge., in the human ecology perspective.

Given the current impasse’ and the fallout of community based sustainable development initiatives, in the dimensions of turbulent ecology, of contemporary times, do we have an audience, listening for a change? Can truly, NGOs and developmental aid initiatives address to such complex people-centered processes and read the signals, instead of confused or wrong ones, on the sustainability matrix?

REFERENCES

  1. Abbot Joanne & Irene Guijt 1998. Changing views of change: Participatory

approaches to monitor the environment. SARL Discussion papers no. 2, IIED,

London. 96 pp.

  1. Balachander S.K. 1999. Studies on Food-Energy Nexus, Non-equilibrium ecology and Farming communities in the peri-urban fringes of Hyderabad, AP, India- A Human Ecology perspective. PhD Dissertation, Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India. 200 pp.
  2. Bergen Margaret & Patralekha Chatterjee 1998. A conversation with Elaben Bhatt. Urban Age, vol. 6, no. 1, The World Bank, Washington DC, 14,-17pp.
  3. Gadgil Madhav & Ramachandra Guha 1995, Ecology & Equity-The use and abuse of nature in contemporary India, Penquin Books, New Delhi, India. 213 pp.
  4. Hamble Helen 1996. Grassroot indicators : measuring and monitoring environmental change at local level. ILEIA Newsletter vol 12, no. 6, Leusden, Netherlands. 14-15.
  5. Harnmeijer Joanne, Anne Waters-Bayer & Wolfgang Bayer 1999. Dimensions of participation in evaluation : Experiences from Zimbabwe and Sudan. Gatekeeper series no. 83,IIED, London. 30. Pp.
  6. Jodha. N.S. 1995. Sustainable Development in fragile environments-An operational framework for arid, semi-arid & mountain regions. Centre for Environmental Education, Ahmedabad, India. 122 pp.
  7. Leach. M, Mearns R & Scoones I. 1997. Challenges to community based sustainable development-Dynamics, Entitlements & Institutions, IDS Bulletin, vol 28. No. 4, London. 4-14 pp
  8. Mearns Robin 1995. Environmental entitlements: towards empowerment for sustainable development. In Singh N C & Titi V (ed). Empowerment for sustainable development, Zed books Ltd, London. 37-53pp.
  9. Peemans J P H 1987, Social implication of Food-Energy technologies, evaluation and perspective. FEN programme. The United Nations University, Paris. 58 pp.
  10. Swepson Pan 1998. Seperating the ideals of research from the methodology of research,either action research or science, can lead to better research. Action Research International, paper 1. Available on-line: 98 html.
  11. Tacoli Cecilia 1998. Bridging the divide. Rural-urban interactions and livelihood strategies. Gatekeeper series no. 77, IIED, London. 17pp.
  12. Wisner 1978. In Report of the Second International Symposium ‘Food-Energy Nexus and Ecosystem’, in Moulik (ed), Oxford & IBH Publishing Co., Ltd, New Delhi, 9-50pp.