Revision summary
Development uses nature as a cheap input and meets ecological and social limits. Chipko and Narmada show livelihood and Adivasi loss behind national projects. Class analysis treats the split as socialised costs and private gains. Anti-growth purity and growth-at-all-costs both fail the poor. Rights, consent and who decides are the sociological resolution.
Model answer
Introduction
- Development and environment are not two separate files. They are a dialectic: growth uses nature as a free input, then meets scarcity, protest, and a legitimacy crisis. Indian cases show who pays for the national surplus.
Body
The dialectic
- Development as dams, mines, highways, and cities treats forests, rivers, and air as resources. Environment returns as flood, pollution, and displaced people.
- Each ‘solution’ creates a new contradiction: a dam yields power and drowns a valley; a green city yields real estate and evicts a slum.
- A. R. Desai’s class dialectic fits: the project socialises loss and privatises gain.
Indian illustrations
- Chipko defended Himalayan forest as livelihood, not as scenery. It showed village women as environmental subjects.
- Narmada and Sardar Sarovar made the dialectic national: irrigation and electricity versus Adivasi submergence. The Narmada Bachao Andolan refused the account book that counted only megawatts.
- Industrial belts and informal workshops dump costs on slum air and river, so the working class lives the environmental bill.
Critiques of both poles
- A crude anti-development stand can freeze rural poverty. A crude growth stand treats Chipko as romance.
- Yogendra Singh’s modernizing state uses science as heterogenetic force; without consent, science is just another landlord.
- Market environmentalism and some NEP-era skill talk can greenwash without land rights.
Toward a sociological resolution
- Environment is a social relation of access to land, water, and air, structured by caste, tribe, and gender.
- Forest Rights Act, environmental impact assessment, and local movements are attempts to institutionalise the dialectic rather than deny it.
- Desired development is livelihoods that do not eat the ecological base of the poor.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD DEV[Development projects] --> ENV[Land river forest air] ENV --> C[Crisis protest displacement] C --> DEV CH[Chipko Narmada] --> C
Conclusion
The dialectic of development and environment in India is class and ethnicity written on land and river. Chipko and Narmada show that growth without consent is dispossession. The task is not to pick one pole. It is to change who decides and who pays.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Discuss the changing nature of industrial working class.
Next question in the 2022 paper (Q8). View answer →
-
Is environment only a middle-class concern?
In India the sharpest fights are often Adivasi, peasant and slum fights over land and water.
-
Can technology end the dialectic?
It can change the terms. It cannot abolish the question of who owns the river.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2022 · Q1(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Elaborate on M.N. Srinivas's structural functionalist approach to the study of Indian society. -
2022 · Q1(e) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Explain Leela Dube's concept of "Seed and Earth" -
2022 · Q2(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 20 marks
Critically examine GS Ghurye's Indological approach to the understanding of Indian society. -
2022 · Q3(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss the material basis of patriarchy as an ideological system. -
2022 · Q5(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss Law as an important instrument for women's empowerment. -
2022 · Q6(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss the changing nature of structure of political elites. -
2022 · Q7(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Discuss recent trends in the structure of migration . -
2021 · Q1(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
What does Dr. B. R. Ambedkar mean by the concept of "Annihilation of caste" ?
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Elaborate on M.N. Srinivas's structural functionalist approach to the study of Indian society.
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
Srinivas replaced a book view of India with a field view from villages such as Rampura. Structure is observed groups; function is how custom holds them together. Dominant caste and Sanskritization explain local power and mobility inside caste. Westernization and politics add new resources without erasing the village system. Conflict theorists say the method underplays class.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Do you agree that the agrarian class structure in India is changing ?Justify your answer with illustrations.
Social Classes in India
Intermediary landlordism declined after land reform. A commercial rich-peasant layer grew in Green Revolution regions. Labour is more migrant and informal, as COVID reverse flows showed. Caste-land overlap and landlessness persist. The structure is changing, not ending.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Elucidate the challenges of integration for tribal communities in india.
Tribal communities in India
Ghurye’s assimilation and Elwin’s protection still frame the debate. Nehruvian integration promised partnership; projects often meant loss of land. Schedules, PESA and the Forest Rights Act are the legal path. Displacement, language loss and a thin elite are the main social risks. Integration must be citizenship with resources, not cultural wipe-out.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.